this post was submitted on 17 Jan 2025
1664 points (98.5% liked)

Microblog Memes

6172 readers
3291 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 9 points 2 hours ago

Look, the problem isn't China getting your data.

The problem is they're not paying a US oligarch for it.

[–] xor@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 hour ago

twitter is american based, only america can subpoena their servers….
with tiktok, china can mess with their servers

[–] manchicken@infosec.pub 24 points 4 hours ago

It's not, there's no evidence that it is, and even if the Chinese were trying to get all of our data they could buy it for far less trouble and expense from any of the American data brokers happy to sell it. They don't need an app to obtain our data, they just need money.

The influence argument is similarly baseless. Cambridge Analytica demonstrated that existing American social media capabilities already permit foreign interference in American public opinion. TikTok is remarkably expensive to run, and the influence campaigns that they could run on Facebook would be much less expensive.

TikTok is competing with American social media companies. It's no better or worse than any other social media company, but because it's not based in the US it's labeled a national security risk. We're happy to let any company collect and sell personal information, so long as they're based in America.

[–] Etterra@discuss.online 13 points 6 hours ago

Because Musky has conned America into thinking he's a smart good American.

[–] dumbass@leminal.space 6 points 5 hours ago
[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 30 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Maybe both are bad?

"Facebook should be under incredibly strict regulation or killed outright" is also a position I'm fond of.

[–] kelargo@lemmy.world 5 points 4 hours ago

The Cambridge Analytica story explains how much I distrust Facebook.

[–] Cliff@lemmy.world 7 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Can someone explain why the author is censored in this screenshot? Isn't it public already?

[–] frayedpickles@lemmy.cafe 1 points 4 hours ago

Copyright violations are fun

[–] testfactor@lemmy.world 23 points 12 hours ago (6 children)

Well, the TikTok lawyers kinda said the quiet part out loud during their SCOTUS brief:

Mr. Francisco contended that the government in a free country “has no valid interest in preventing foreign propaganda” and cannot constitutionally try to keep Americans from being “persuaded by Chinese misinformation.” That is targeting the content of speech, which the First Amendment does not permit, he said.

It's not a great look for your app when your argument before the Supreme Court is "yeah, we're a propaganda machine for a hostile foreign power, but free speech says you can't stop us. Neener neener."

[–] voldage@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago (3 children)

The issue for common people regarding tiktok is more along the lines of foreign adversaries obtaining personal information of the users or using it to spy on the government. The idea that chinese propaganda would be in any way a threat is absurd and shouldn't even need to be defended in any way. "America bad" is hardly a hot take and they don't need to spread any lies to get that point across.

[–] sexual_tomato@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

The issue for common people regarding tiktok is more along the lines of foreign adversaries obtaining personal information of the users or using it to spy on the government

What's the difference between Facebook / Meta selling my data to whoever, vs. TikTok harvesting it themselves?

[–] voldage@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

There is no difference, neither should be allowed to do that. Person I replied to claimed the issue is chinese propaganda instead of any actual security risks.

[–] testfactor@lemmy.world 4 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

How is it any different than the Russian propaganda campaign to get Trump elected? Or was that something you were fine with as well?

When you let a foreign government run an active psyop campaign against your citizens, you're just begging for instability and chaos.

[–] voldage@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

And how is it different than Dems calling Trump Hitler, regardless of how accurate it was? Should they also be tried for "propaganda"? And how about goverments claiming they're doing well, should they be tried for propaganda? How about the entire red scare propaganda? How about anti-arab propaganda? Putting someone on a trial for "propaganda" is a dangerous violation of free speech. If you can prove they've been lying, then at best they're at the same playing field as the government suing them, and in case of tiktok as far as I am aware there is no evidence that they were spreading any lies. It's just that they weren't censoring the genocide Israel commited in Gaza, unlike platforms aligned with USA, like Meta or Twitter. Which censorship was most definitely a propaganda, but instead of them it's tiktok that's being punished for not doing it? It's nonsense. Boosting negative commentary about foreign country is basic freedom of speech, and attempting to silence that feels very dictatorial. It's what China did with a lot of internet for spreading propaganda against them, don't you feel like removing Youtube access in China for making anti-chinese material available was bad for free speech? I wouldn't mind tiktok getting closed for spying on people, but it's obvious they don't want a precedent for that. Blocking propaganda? Bullshit.

As for me "being fine with" other peoples freedom of speech, I dislike what they had to say and I'd want them to be punished for lying, but I'd never advocate against them having option to speak. You end up living in a dictatorship by doing that. I'm not a free speech absolutist, by any stretch of imagination, but banning platforms for containing content casting bad light on you is going too far for me. Especially since there are much better reasons to do so.

[–] MyNameIsIgglePiggle@sh.itjust.works 4 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

I disagree. I think it's incredibly dangerous for a malevolent actor to control the media we consume and can erode the community from within.

Just look at fox news.

[–] voldage@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

So in your view Fox News should be banned because they're propaganda machine for the right wing, calling out Dems for their faults and praising Reps for anything they did? Or because they're lying pieces of shit that helped manufacture a false narrative that eroded democracy and allowed fascists to get in power? Because, as far as I know, tiktok didn't do the later and it's the platform that got banned.

[–] xor@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 11 hours ago (5 children)

that’s not what they’re saying, they’re saying even if they were chinese propaganda, it would be protected under the first amendment for americans to read what they want and make their own decisions….

but, nice 4th grader logic you got there.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›