We should ban all apps that harvest personal data.
this post was submitted on 20 Apr 2024
79 points (89.1% liked)
politics
19090 readers
4274 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Yeah, I'd be okay with that but this bill doesn't even ban TikTok. It forces ByteDance to sell TikTok or face being banned. Our leadership is fine with out data being endlessly harvested by megacorps, but they don't want China to run one of the megacorps doing it.
It's kind of funny really, because even if China/ByteDance sells TikTok they could just switch from harvesting personal data directly with TikTok to buying all the data harvested from TikTok and other platforms just like the USA already does.
China already buys everything Meta and friends are selling.
All Meta sells are ad placements. They do not sell user data.
Lmao.
I think it is a lot simpler in the mind of politicians: "Tiktok is popular in America but not American. How can we make it ours?"
The American government, unlike China, does not own American companies.
In fact, aren’t most big tech profits accrued in Ireland?
They want to force a sell it to a group of republicans. Possibly for the profit, possibly to control the media.
Instead of banning specific apps, ban the harvest and sale of personal data itself. Then the apps people want to use are still given a chance to exist if they stop mining data.
You basically just rephrased what I said.
No, you said we should ban apps, I said we should have better privacy laws. Two totally different things.
Yes but it's splitting hairs... If you ban alcoholic drinks it's basically the same as banning putting alcohol in drinks. Especially for a conversation between laymen on Lemmy
It's more like we should ban the addition of unsafe additives to alcohol vs banning a specific brand of alcohol, even though most brands add it.
That's not why it was banned though. That part is ok lol
There are two wolves inside you: One hates US politics, the other hates TikTok.
It's weird how I the US every bill does like everything and I don't think that's good but also short form videos are absolute cancer and anything that reduced that is a good thing.
I hope Europe takes some inspiration from this and either forces all data harvesting companies be sold to a European owner or be banned.
This is what fascist countries do. They see something they like and say "gimme". US is such a shithole.
Tiktok is cancer, so I'm okay with this.
Edit: I'm not sure why I can't reply to the commenter that replied to my comment. So I'll quote him and reply here:
Regardless of your opinion on TikTok, you shouldn’t be okay with the government targeting a specific app.
Would you feel the same if it were Grindr, under the guise of “protecting children?”
How about encrypted messaging apps because the government doesn’t like that they can’t read messages?
This whole thing is dangerously close to infringing on freedoms over ideology, rather than just being about foreign surveillance.
TikTok is an extreme example. If it were Grindr under the guise of "protecting the children," I'd say it's bullshit. But let's not be naive here. TikTok is made and controlled by the Chinese government through a Chinese company. It's an actual national security concern, so yes, I'm okay with what they're going through right now. Deservedly so.
Regardless of your opinion on TikTok, you shouldn't be okay with the government targeting a specific app.
Would you feel the same if it were Grindr, under the guise of "protecting children?"
How about encrypted messaging apps because the government doesn't like that they can't read messages?
This whole thing is dangerously close to infringing on freedoms over ideology, rather than just being about foreign surveillance.