Trump To Ban US TikTok and WeChat App Store Downloads on September 20 (theverge.com) 206
The US Commerce Department has issued a new order to block people in the US from downloading the popular video-sharing app TikTok as of September 20th, Reuters first reported Friday. From a report: The full order was published by the Department of Commerce on Friday morning. "Any transaction by any person, or with respect to any property, subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, with ByteDance Ltd," the order reads, "shall be prohibited to the extent permitted under applicable law." It is set to take effect on September 20th. Over the last few weeks, TikTok's Chinese parent company, ByteDance, has been engaged in talks with US companies like Microsoft and Oracle to create a new company, TikTok Global, that would meet the Trump administration's concerns over user data security.
*clap clap clap* (Score:2)
*clap clap clap clap clap*
US freedom (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:US freedom (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
"land of the free"? Only if if someone in power is profitting off it....
Re: (Score:2)
You're free to do as we tell you [youtube.com].
Re: (Score:2)
more than just apple. shots have been fired
Re:US freedom (Score:4, Insightful)
What I’d like to see is Apple telling the Trump administration to choke on a bag of dicks. I have every expectation though that they’ll just roll over and comply, because there’s no profit for them in fighting this legal battle.
Would be nice to see a big company stand up for the constitution, though.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The next step should be governments making it illegal for companies to have their "financial headquarters" in other countries so they pay very little taxes. Apple is clearly a U.S. company, not based in Ireland.
Re:US freedom (Score:5, Insightful)
And while we're at it, perhaps some laws forcing Presidential candidates to open up their tax returns and their books so everyone can make sure they're not in breach of the Emoluments Clause.
Oh that's right, transparency and accountability are only for other other people.
Re:US freedom (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes, people really do care about it, because it can help identify where money is coming from for the people expected to lead us.
We know without a doubt he over-inflates his net worth, and has done so for decades and has proven to do so in court. The over-inflated net worth isn't the concern. The concern is him claiming he's not being paid by Russia, despite Trump Jr literally admitting that the family is being paid by them on TV.
The concern is knowing who owns our politicians, and Trump is fully owned by foreign dictators. The senate even released a report very recently confirming as much.
Re:US freedom (Score:5, Interesting)
First, it's called transparency. It shows where you get your money and from whom. You have a book deal and got half a million last year? Congratulations. You have a line item for half a million from Russia, hmmmm.
Second, apparently Lindsey Graham suddenly has an interest in someone else's taxes [cnn.com]. I say apparently because he's been claiming the con artist not releasing any tax returns is no big deal but is now all hot and bothered his opponent hasn't done so.
So yes, by not releasing your taxes as a public official, you are bypassing that tradition to hide corrupt moneyed interests.
And for the record, if you are a government employee, federal or state, you are required to submit a form each year indicating any conflicts of interests you might have in relation to your job, and any outside sources of income from any other job, both of which are public records.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Good news; that's out of date. [huffpost.com]
Re: (Score:2)
People could see that he was an honest broker; that he had nothing to hide, no ill dealings. With Trump, there are open questions, from some pretty strong evidence that he has grossly overinflated his net worth, to serious questions as to sources of funding from Russia. That he has fought tooth and nail to keep public scrutiny away from his financial dealings, whereas Romney was trustworthy enough and trusted voters enough to open his financials demonstrates a great degree of honor.
Besides, voters should al
Re: (Score:3)
Yet nothing substantial resulted from the Mueller investigation, the lawfare campaign that took three years with a $35 million warchest and a general warrant to look for crimes. If there was anything, it would have been article three of the impeachment attempt.
That suggests to me that the tax returns don't have the kryptonite that can be used to hurt Trump, or otherwise it probably would have been leaked already. As long as Trump refuses to release the forms himself, then it can be used to spread FUD.
Romney
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, the "unindicted co-conspirator" must have been Ronald McDonald or something...
Re:US freedom (Score:5, Insightful)
No, the Mueller investigation had a very limited warrant. It did not look directly into Trump or general crimes; it only looked into Russian election interference and directly related matters. The Trump campaign was looked into where it related to the Russians, but the investigation did not go much beyond that. Mueller was a stickler for following the letter of his Order, and did not go on the type of fishing expedition that Ken Starr went on against Bil Clinton.
Re: (Score:3)
The entire Mueller investigation was built on the 'salacious and unverified' Steele dossier which the FBI used to lie to the FISA court, and you want to tell me that they didn't have a blank check to go after anyone and everyone in Trump's orbit as a result. Sure, I also believe everything it says on the tin.
From Flynn to Manafort to Roger Stone, all were busted for matters completely unrelated to matters 'directly related to Russian election interference'. That was the 'insurance policy', because Trump jus
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I'd expect someone allegedly working for me to tell me if he gets paid by my competitor.
I actually have it in my contract that my employer has the right to have my finances reviewed if he has reasonable suspicion that I'm in violation of the non-compete clause in it. And while I can screw him over badly if I so please, I have nowhere near the abilities of the POTUS to do so.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:US freedom (Score:4, Interesting)
The Chinese have been strongly hinting that if WeChat and TikTok are banned then they will retaliate against Apple.
Re: (Score:2)
The CCP is likely to retaliate because we might actually want to protect against their spying and subversion? They'd punish a globalist megacorp that decided to maximize profits by utilizing Chinese sweatshop labor? Sounds terrible.
Dealing with communist bandits has its risks. Our captains of industry would do well to realize that.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Let’s see... bump stock ban, raising the smoking age, and now banning an app. If you yanked someone from an alternate dimension where Trump wasn’t president and asked them which party was doing these things, I seriously doubt they’d answer “Republican”.
You guys absolutely lost your party.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:US freedom (Score:5, Informative)
Then you should class yourself as a low information voter. Republicans have only cared about the national debt when there was a Democrat in the Whitehouse. The last time the National Debt went down was when Clinton was in office.
Republicans have pushed up the national debt, wasting the money on unnecessary foreign wars.
Re: (Score:2)
And trillions of dollars of socialist payments to corporations.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That may have been the case decades ago, but it isn't now. Today, the Republican party stands for only two things, one of which is increasing the wealth of the super-wealthy -- even if this means screwing the long-term future of the USA.
Re: (Score:2)
I have no major party in the US to represent me.
The "major parties," put together, don't come anywhere close to representing most of the voters in this country. They stay in power by tricking a majority of people into voting for them anyway.
Re:US freedom (Score:5, Interesting)
I feel you. I'm the same way.
I voted Republican all of my (voting) life due to it lining up the best. I didn't vote in 2016 because I couldn't bring myself to like either candidate.
This year I'll be voting for Biden. At the very least, I just want to send a message to the Republican party that I'm not personally going to put up with a liar as a president. Voting the other direction is the ONLY actual input I have... so that's what I'm doing.
Until we get voting reform (Maine is actually making some headway here!), we will never get out of this mess. We need something along the lines of ranked voting so we can feel free to vote for smaller parties without that meaning that someone we DONT want is more likely to be president....
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Dear President (Score:2)
**FU**
Re: (Score:2)
Hey there! Glad to see someone else who went to Fun University!
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
"Standing up" (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
China is a nasty bunch of Communist Nazis when Trump wants to twist their arm in his stupid-ass trade war or force the sale of one of their companies to one of his cronies, but a respectable sovereign nation if anyone wants to take any meaningful action or even post a strongly-worded letter against their human rights abuses.
Re:"Standing up" (Score:4, Interesting)
The con artist also praised Xi [politico.com] when covid-19 was rampaging in China and getting its steam up in the U.S., not to mention he promised Xi he wouldn't say a word about China's use of force in Hong Kong [thehill.com] while he was trying to worm his way out of the failure called trade negotiations with China.
Re: (Score:2)
i'ma let you finish but IBM was instrumental to Nazi Germany before, leading up to, and during the second great war.
IBM and the Holocaust [wikipedia.org]
Next up (Score:2)
Next up book burning. Now everyone get your copy of Art of War and an ignition source. 3, 2, 1, light'em up.
Re: Next up (Score:4, Informative)
Books don't siphon off all the communication that they overhear and send it to The Eye of Sauron, so please stop with the false comparison of banning a digital security threat to book burning.
If you are worried about US made apps spying on you like the Communist Chinese apps do, then you can choose to use only open source apps for which you can inspect and contribute to the source code. The key words here are 'choose', 'open' and 'contribute'.
Stop being sheeple, people.
The whole point of the internet was to provide a robust and decentralized communication framework. We've been herded into a very small number of centralized, walled garden points of control. Those that are free to choose a path out of these centralized points of control should probably do so as soon as possible if they want to preserve a culture of 'open' and 'choice' where they can actually contribute.
Re: (Score:2)
Even if you use all open-source whatever, you can't do that with the hardware. CPUs have hidden parts that you don't control and can't be 100% sure that it's not spying on you.
Re: (Score:2)
Even if you use all open-source whatever, you can't do that with the hardware. CPUs have hidden parts that you don't control and can't be 100% sure that it's not spying on you.
Bingo. It's really tiring to hear "use open source" as it magically were a damned panacea. I'm all for open source, but it isn't a confetti-farting unicorn.
Closed app stores make this possible (Score:5, Insightful)
So how is this legal? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's from the commerce department, not from the DoD
So in what possible parallel universe would this be legal? If it was for defense reasons I could see it.
Isn't this a violation of international trade agreements?
Re: So how is this legal? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
You want government to push back against the dictators overseas, locking down their populations under eternal surveillance, as they succeed in exporting censorship via kow towing Hollywood and sports stars?
Kicking the oligarchs there, who become billionaires with a finger in these curiously fast-rising and unencumbered (by red tape) companies, well, this is what it looks like.
Security concerns? Sure. But a gonad kick in the wallet while doing it is fine.
Why? (Score:2)
Has any specific reason been cited by the administration for banning these apps other than Trump doesn't like China?
Re: (Score:3)
You can read the executive order [whitehouse.gov] online. Here's the part which explains the justification:
TikTok automatically captures vast swaths of information from its users, including Internet and other network activity information such as location data and browsing and search histories. This data collection threatens to allow the Chinese Communist Party access to Americans’ personal and proprietary information — potentially allowing China to track the locations of Federal employees and contractors, build dossiers of personal information for blackmail, and conduct corporate espionage.
Re: (Score:3)
It's also true that the US government does exactly the thing it complains the Chinese government might do -- buy private data that it is not legally allowed to collect itself.
The concerns raised by the executive order are serious, but that doesn't mean the government takes the seriously.
There are also genuine civil rights issues here too -- this is shutting down a venue for self-expression, silly as that expression may seem. The step taken here is not, in legal parlance "narrowly tailored" to achieve the s
saving lives through leadership!! (Score:4, Funny)
How many Americans are dying every day due to TikTok? I saw last weekend 17 people in Chicago alone were killed, presumedly from using TikTok. This needs to end and it takes bravery to stand up to fight for America and end the oppression we've suffered from apps like this. Mothers won't have to cry themselves to sleep anymore worrying if their children with be "TikTok'ed" on the mean streets. This is what leadership is all about!
I am conflicted (Score:5, Insightful)
On one hand, yes, China has an authoritarian regime that tortures, kills and detains anyone it finds troublesome in large numbers and every company in China has to work with the regime.
But on the other hand restricting freedoms in the west is not the right way to fight totalitarianism. More freedom is the way, not less freedom.
And this is just a small step in the rise of totalitarian measures in the west, I fear that we will eventually end up as they say "unless you are careful you will likely become what you fight" and thus become totalitarian too.
Re: I am conflicted (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Personally I think that more education and spotlighting the thing that CCP does is the key. During most of the cold war there was not a big doubt in most peoples minds about the Soviet regime. So getting the same sort of response would be way better than reducing rights.
Thus getting people to stop using it because they see the risk and the approval of the CCP they are implicitly giving, rarther than reducing freedoms.
If we're going that route banning Tik Tok (Score:2)
But that's not what this is about. Tik Tok Teens made a fool of Trump. Young people are organizing politically on the app. This is about shutting down young political organizing before it becomes a threat to the powers that be. Nothing will be don
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed, automated production might well be biggest of the several things that helps break the CCP in the end.
Basically with many companies looking at reducing their exposure to future things like covid, might well cause many of them to look seriously at automated production closer to home.
If enough such companies find it possible to use local automated production it might seriously hinder the Chinese economy and thus in the end lower the legitimacy of the CCPs government of China in the eyes of the Chinese
Re: (Score:2)
every company in China has to work with the regime. But on the other hand restricting freedoms in the west is not the right way to fight totalitarianism. More freedom is the way, not less freedom.
I think that is the main conundrum in all of this. How do you "fight" a totalitarianism nation that is the size/power of China? We definitely would not have a Ground War because that would be mutual assured destruction. How do you fight the fact that this app could be/is compromising our data & privacy, while not out right banning it? It is a difficult question, maybe give all the information to the people and let them decide? But in today's hyper partisan society I doubt people will listen to it if i
Re: (Score:2)
You fight it by getting all parties to support a free society and oppose nonfree societies. If that requires internal work in something like a party in any given country, then that is the first step. But in the end all major parties in all democracies should support more freedoms for all people in the world and should oppose countries with the opposite agenda.
So if you are member of a party, then work inside the party to increase freedom and knowledge and oppose totalitarianism in any country.
If you are no
Re: (Score:2)
I think the way to deal with being conflicted is to look at the claims being made, the evidence to support those claims, and whether the words and actions of the actors are consistent with their claims.
I agree the Chinese regime is reprehensible, but the case against TikTok and administration actions are not really credible. It's all part of a political dispute in which the Administration is trying to curry public favor.
For example earlier the Administration indicated it was open to a sale as long as the d
Re: (Score:2)
On one hand, yes, China has an authoritarian regime that tortures, kills and detains anyone it finds troublesome in large numbers and every company in China has to work with the regime.
But on the other hand restricting freedoms in the west is not the right way to fight totalitarianism. More freedom is the way, not less freedom.
And this is just a small step in the rise of totalitarian measures in the west, I fear that we will eventually end up as they say "unless you are careful you will likely become what you fight" and thus become totalitarian too.
Yep. Also, let's not forget that our dear leader lacks the balls to call or support a nation-wide mask mandate (he doesn't nor can order one, but he can use his position to support one). But he's quite quick to stamp out that evil kid-dancing app. Leadership!
Re: (Score:2)
United states has "always" had a dirty laundry basks as part of their identity, if you look at things like the support for dictators around the world (Think of the things like the support for the Chilean junta in the past or current support for Saudi Arabia) .
And it definitely includes things like detaining Japanese ancestry Americans during WW2, McCarthyism, Torture during the war on terror, unmarked prisons with torture around the world, the treatment of refuges that you point to and so on.
And all those s
This is going to get shut down in the courts (Score:2)
Also as I've pointed out elsewhere this has nothing to do with China and everything to do with young people (who traditionally vote Democrat) using Tik Tok to organize politically. This is part of a broader scheme to disrupt that sort of political organization. It's basically the 2020 equivalent of Nixon's Drug war (google it if you don't already know).
Re: This is going to get shut down in the courts (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Or possibly a Bill of Attainder challenge as well.
And the Herd Mentality (Score:2)
cheered on while marching around a pile of burnt masks.
WeChat full traffic ban? (Score:2)
According to the CNN write-up of the directive (https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/18/tech/tiktok-download-commerce/index.html), any and all internet traffic containing WeChat data will be illegal. I wonder how they plan to enforce that, exactly, and who it would be enforced against. A lot of Chinese Americans apparently use WeChat to stay in touch with their families in China. This could be turn to sinophobic ends pretty easily, via selective enforcement.
The executive order also prevents TikTok from applying secu
Re: (Score:2)
The alleged president already signaled what would make him happy: he claimed the U.S. Government should get a cut of any deal because he himself forced the sale. Seeing as the U.S. Government cannot accept funds that way, what he's really saying is that he'll be expecting his short on cash campaign should realize some gains from this. The alleged president corrupts absolutely anything he touches. And Uncle Larry will be happy to ante up if he can keep it under the table so the press won't roast him.
Leal basis (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm a noob when it comes to US legal system. What's the legal basis that allows the executive branch to forbid any transaction with a specific company?
How is that not the result of the judicial branch (said company is breaking the law -> no transaction) or the legislative branch (implement a new law that forbid the type of activities that said company does -> no transaction with all similar companies)?
Re: (Score:3)
I'm a noob when it comes to US legal system. What's the legal basis that allows the executive branch to forbid any transaction with a specific company?
Executive order, which would then fall on the Judicial Branch to declare invalid/unconstitutional, or Congress to pass legislation either affirming or contravening that executive order. The Trump Administration has relied heavily on Executive Orders to enact policies as a way to get around Congress (many of these have been blocked by the courts as unconstitutional). For reference, in less than 1 term, Trump has issued 183 executive orders, while over 2 terms each Obama, Bush, and Clinton issued 276, 291,
Re: (Score:2)
Supine Congress is much more scared of doing something challengers can call them out on in the next election, than benefits they will get from brownie points. Hence they are happy letting the executive branch overreach. Bonus! They get to bitch about the executive, too!
Re: Leal basis (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Domestic companies? None. Foreign entities? Plenty. The International Trafficing in Arms Regulations for example delegate to the executive branch the ability to limit munitions sales by US persons to foreign entities. And the definition of munitions is quite broad and does include computer software.
ITAR would not work.The software is coming into the US, not out. But there are certainly plenty of legal ways for Trump to block it from coming in. ITAR is specific to exports.
Re: Leal basis (Score:3)
Re:Legal basis (Score:2)
There's little legal basis, but our Attorney General is corrupt, and will lick Donald Trump's unbleached anus to make the fat boy happy. While the US has not yet fully succumbed to totalitarianism, the Republican Party has supported Trump even when we have seen generous helpings of criminal activity, sexual predatory behavior, and general cruelty vomit forth from his venomous mouth. And yes, Democrats are mostly supine, not doing much more than complaining about these transgressions, rather than taking real
Re: (Score:2)
To be honest, I don't know. It seems awfully close to a Bill of Attainder to me.
The difference being that this is an Executive order and not an act of Congress.
Re: (Score:2)
The executive order cites International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.).
The Constitutional basis for this is Congress delegating some of its Article 1 powers to the president. The oldest example of this is the existence of the Treasury Department -- treasury functions are actually vested in Congress by the Constitution, but that was quickly found to be unworkable.
In most cases (including this one) legislation delegating powers to the president are supposed to exercised only in extrao
Awesome! (Score:2)
Way to mobilize youth and Chinese voters against Trump!
Re: Awesome! (Score:2)
Why Tik-Tok? (Score:2, Insightful)
1. China Hacking RSA to get access to be able to bypass RSA's 2FA Solution [darkreading.com]
2. The Theft of Aviation Industry Intellectual Property [aviationtoday.com]
3. Being the biggest threat to US Intellectual Property in the World [theguardian.com]
4. The Theft of Renewable Energy Trade Secrets [renewableenergyworld.com]
I could keep going, but you get the point.
So what does Donald Trump think is China's most egregious abuse at the moment? Ti
Re: (Score:3)
Oh yeah, it's not that those apps are Chinese spyware. People are mocking Trump on it, that's must be the reason for it.
Listen, my friend, Hillary lost. It's time for you to get over it.
What are you some sort of Russian troll? I agree that this is spyware but the fact of the matter is that the DoD has been restricting TikTok use on DoD devices for a while now and the president did not give a damn about it until the Tulsa rally where millions of TikTok users organized on the platform to drive up the expected size of the Tulsa rally only to no-show and leave the president in a half empty arena.
Okay, so they're banned... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
... and nothing of value has been lost.
Other than a platform that makes it easy for people to be publicly critical of the President.
Re: (Score:2)
Apps still will work? (Score:2)
I still can't find a straight answer anywhere about whether the apps will still work after the deadline. Sure, you can't download them, but if you have them already installed, will they continue to work?
The NYT article says "The restrictions will ban the transferring of funds or processing of payments through WeChat within the United States as of Sunday. In the case of WeChat, the restrictions will also prevent any company from offering internet hosting, content delivery networks, internet transit or peeri
Re: (Score:3)
I still can't find a straight answer anywhere about whether the apps will still work after the deadline. Sure, you can't download them, but if you have them already installed, will they continue to work?
If the order is enforceable (and it may not be), they stop working. The relevant words of what's forbidden:
...internet hosting, content delivery networks, internet transit or peering services to WeChat...
No transit means no data flows, which means the app stops working.
Re: (Score:3)
I believe WeChat will stop working, while TikTok will continue to work, you just won't be able to download/update it from any app store.
Troubling (Score:3)
Here's what will happen (Score:2)
One portion of the TikTok users will use VPN to get around it, the others will turn to shady sources to get it and load their devices with malware. Trump will feel like he did something, TikTok doesn't lose any users and everyone is happy. Especially the malware business.
To the extent permitted (Score:2)
So... not prohibited at all?
Oracle gambit failed, next move? (Score:3)
This is interesting because Bytedance did try to do the "cooperation deal" or whatever they called it with Oracle instead of selling. This let them dodge the supposed "you are not allowed to sell the recommendation algorithms" PRC law while throwing a bone to US and supposedly Trump personally and Larry Ellison is a known Trump supporter.
It appears to have failed. It makes me wonder what the next move will be.
Can anyone link to more technical details? (Score:3)
Re:Another approach (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Another approach (Score:5, Funny)
"Canadian Spying But Sorry About It App1", "Canadian Spying But Sorry About It App2", etc.
Re: (Score:2)
With an exception for the US spying apps of course.
Re: (Score:2)
Still waiting for disclaimers at the beginning of Hollywood movies:
Warning! This movie was written an edited to be acceptable to a dictatorship that will ban it, and other unrelated films from this company, if it isn't.
Foreign governments have no right to speak, at least without clear notice to Americans.
Citation Needed (Score:2)
Re: Citation Needed (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The last four years have seen a parade of court challenges to Trump's reversal of Obama's executive orders that all roughly sounded like, "the president might have the statutory authority to do this, but there are rules established in law that he has to follow to do it, and he hasn't followed those rules" . . .
FTFY
Re: (Score:2)
Thank you. The next time a Democrat is president, suddenly executive overreach will disappear as they assign it an importance weight of 0 instead of infinity.
Re: Citation Needed (Score:2, Interesting)
I thought DACA was an abuse. Obama had no authority to start issuing defacto residence permits to illegals, not matter how you dress it up as prosecutorial discretion. An