• InevitableSwing [none/use name]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      62
      ·
      7 months ago

      The context is a chef’s kiss.

      The US isn’t just reauthorizing its surveillance laws - it’s vastly expanding them | Caitlin Vogus | The Guardian

      The US House of Representatives agreed to reauthorize a controversial spying law known as Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act last Friday without any meaningful reforms, dashing hopes that Congress might finally put a stop to intelligence agencies’ warrantless surveillance of Americans’ emails, text messages and phone calls.

      The vote not only reauthorized the act, though; it also vastly expanded the surveillance law enforcement can conduct. In a move that Senator Ron Wyden condemned as “terrifying”, the House also doubled down on a surveillance authority that has been used against American protesters, journalists and political donors in a chilling assault on free speech.

    • knfrmity@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      ·
      7 months ago

      They care about surveillance alright. They just need to be the ones surveilling and reality inventing.

      • Rod_Blagojevic [none/use name]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        7 months ago

        I’m wondering is if the driving interest is to ensure American companies own most of the social media that Americans use because they don’t want to lose the means to surveil large portions of the population. They very much act like there’s a threat to state power, and this is the only angle that makes sense.

        The alternative is that the state is now dominated by racist boomers that actually believe the red scare propaganda their predecessors made up.

        • knfrmity@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          7 months ago

          There are two requirements the US ruling class has for internet connected tech: surveillance opportunities and content distribution and censorship capabilities.

          That’s why we saw the fuss about Huawei five years ago, and that’s why there’s been a fuss about TikTok over the last five years as well. Huawei isn’t a US military or intelligence adjacent or contracted company, so the NSA and Co can’t roll in and mandate backdoors into Huawei’s networking products. The TikTok available in the imperial core, while already being somewhat controlled by the US military-intelligence apparatus already, still doesn’t allow for enough surveillance and equally importantly doesn’t allow for enough content control. The US ruling class knows it’s losing the narrative war, and is trying everything it can to reign that in.

          What politicians actually believe doesn’t really matter. Some have bathed in the kool-aid, others know it’s just theater. What really matters is what the capitalists believe, and they are pretty clear on what they have to do to maintain power.

        • redtea@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          7 months ago

          The alternative is that the state is now dominated by racist boomers that actually believe the red scare propaganda their predecessors made up.

          Phyrric victory hours.

    • Pentacat [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      7 months ago

      Nobody has ever explained to me why any person in the US should care about a government with no jurisdiction over them might conduct surveillance on them. The government that worries me is the one that has power over me. Maybe I’m stupid, though.

      • anarchoilluminati [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        7 months ago

        One reason could be because that other government may not be bound to rules regarding surveillance on people who are not citizens of their country, thus can’t be held accountable, and then that government could share that information with anyone they want including that government where the person is a citizen.

        But then I’m just describing Five Eyes and US surveillance again anyway.

  • FourteenEyes [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    68
    ·
    7 months ago

    I can see TikTok calling their bluff and then Gen Z just using VPNs to get around it so now all the ad dollars flow exclusively to Chinese companies instead of American ones

    • SacredExcrement [any, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      50
      ·
      7 months ago

      That is what will happen

      over 1.7 billion users as of 2023

      TikTok has 150 million active monthly users in the United States.

      I’m guessing that 1.7 billion number is prolly off due to bots and defunct accounts, but still, you don’t sell your platform for 10% of your market lmao. I’m not sure if the US thought they would honestly back down just because they’re America, if they wanted to ban it because they honestly think it’s spying on Americans, or what exactly the play here was, but the obvious one (force them to sell to Americans) was laughably stupid and unlikely to happen for obvious reasons.

      • AcidLeaves [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        32
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        tbh that 10% of the market probably contributes about ~30-40% of the revenue

        Western users typical contribute >10x more revenue than all other users for adtech platforms, and just ~20-30% of users will contribute to 90% of the revenue (my source is my employers’ internal analytics dashboard)

        Here is Google’s (note that rest of world includes all other developed countries too like Canada, Europe, Oceania, East Asia)

      • someone [comrade/them, they/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        37
        ·
        7 months ago

        I’ve always found it darkly comical that United States government policymakers, masters of the art of soft power in the first cold war, is now staffed with people who can’t conceive why anyone would use soft power and always leaped to military options. They can’t imagine the government of China continuing economic soft-power control over Taiwan for long-term reintegration purposes. Because US policymakers would never do such a thing themselves.

          • DamarcusArt@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            7 months ago

            Can you talk more about it here? It’s a fascinating concept really. It always seems to happen in the decline of empires without fail.

              • DamarcusArt@lemmygrad.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                7 months ago

                It really does seem more and more likely that the current crop of “leadership” in the west believes their own bullshit that they peddle to the masses for sure. A big part of it is probably the collapse of the USSR, they pre-emptively declared “victory” and haven’t really bothered to maintain their imperialist project in a sustainable way because they assume there are no (or weren’t even aware of) any alternatives. This would explain a lot of their actions towards China. Both begging China to help them out and also putting tariffs on them and interfering with Taiwan. They honestly seem to think that the “lesser countries” are obligated to do what the west demands and the west can just destroy them automatically. There’s a similar situation with Russia there too, they assumed that their embargoes would destroy Russia because they are the wealthy and powerful west, so cutting off trade with them destroys economies. But they didn’t actually bother to check what Russia’s reaction would be and whether they could survive just fine without western trade. Just pure arrogance and chauvinism.

          • SkingradGuard [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            7 months ago

            Is it really a decline in competency or just blatant arrogance? Like, they believe they can be more brazen and do whatever they want without pushback because they’ve been the world hegemon for decades

      • hello_hello [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Why would the US fund China?

        Ohhhh man fuck these people. I hope the seperatists get cold feet and China is able to confiscate Taipei’s assets and create a new government.

    • knfrmity@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      7 months ago

      Large private companies are effectively the state, so the term nationalisation isn’t so far from the truth.

  • lorty@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    7 months ago

    Considering this includes an aid bill with it, would it pass the US senate?

  • SerLava [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    7 months ago

    Yanis Varoufakis was recently saying some interesting stuff about TikTok. Basically TikTok is a way for a Chinese company to generate data capital in a way that cant be taxed or restricted in ports, and that drives US capital crazy.

    He also connected it with the Huawei ban- basically the US is terrified of China’s free universal digital banking, because it could threaten to unseat the dollar as the international trade currency.

    • MaoShanDong [none/use name]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      7 months ago

      There are a couple of points to consider the biggest one being that Americans as a user base are but a fraction of the global base,less than 10% iirc, and one of the hardest to monetize. Outside of financial considerations it’s worth more to keep tiktok just for the global soft power it exerts on the other parts of the world and to send a message as well.

  • Zuberi 👀@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    7 months ago

    Still only going to be banned under trump. They extended it to 9-12 months specifically to keep it alive through the election to hurt genojoe