Apple Removes TikTok From App Store on iPhones and iPads in the U.S.

[JonathanX64]

The three greatest «inventions» of 21st-century China—fentanyl, COVID-19, and TikTok. Interesting pattern...

The ban certainly seems like great news for Americans.

 

[mogens]

Wrong headline: AIPAC REMOVES….
https://truthout.org/articles/tikto...-in-gaza-is-that-why-electeds-want-it-banned/

 

[wikiverse]

How does it "say it all" exactly? You think the US government would stay silent if a foreign government tried to manipulate a US company into selling a product of theirs to a foreign competitor? This is not a free market move in the first place, why would any government treat it as such?

The US government has stayed silent about China banning Facebook, twitter, google and other apps, which is no different to the US government now banning Tiktok. The Chinese government never bothered demanding those companies divest their Chinese operations, they just banned them. The US government would have allowed those companies to sell off their Chinese operations and collect a license fee if it was in the shareholder interests to do so (such as losing revenue entirely from a total ban on the service in the Chinese market).

The US government isn't demanding that they sell all of Tiktok, just the US operation. They would still collect revenue from a license fee (and possible a % of ad revenue), but the Chinese govt won't allow it. So it's not about the money.

 

[mansplains]

Curious how people here complain non-stop about government overreach and censorship in the EU. But are now happy the most popular app in the US gets banned.

Also: the big winner in this story will be Trump when he gets the app back. It’s just mind blowing how lucky this guy is.

The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the ban, ruling that it does not violate First Amendment rights, as the law targets TikTok’s data practices and ties to a foreign adversary, rather than regulating content or speech. I wouldn’t characterize it as censorship in the traditional sense. We’ll see what comes of it as far as overreach, however.

 

[hagjohn]

The problem isn't that people's data is being sold by TikTok, it's that it's being given to the the Chinese Government - who are using it for anything and everything from selling it (independent of TikTok), to training AI, to engaging in political interference. Banning or forcing a sale are the only ways to resolve that issue.

Most companies don't sell data - that's what is valuable. The use the data to sell 'access' to users through their own ad platforms (facebook, X, google etc.). Most data hacks aren't from social media companies. They're from telcos and banks and other non-tech companies you deal with ona day-to-day basis.

Your data is being sold by Facebook, twitter and etc…but nobody seems to care about them.

 

[vantelimus]

I mean I know he says that, but the law is pretty clear, and the Apple and Google can’t just ignore the law. While I know he can give them an extension, based on the text of the law I’m not sure he can without lying to Congress.

Enforcement is the job of the executive. Trump can choose not to enforce that law. Like it or not, that is the way the constitution is set up. Congress can impeach and remove him if they don't like it. That won't happen because this Congress and our Supreme Court are fully set on letting Trump have an imperial presidency.

 

[555gallardo]

Great, we can now continue being harvested and have our politics influenced by Facebook propagandists.

 

[Krizoitz]

Literally every free app is selling your data one way or another and also, it can only "sell", what you expose to the app in the first place.

You don’t know what literally or sell mean do you?

 

[neuropsychguy]

“It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine” R.E.M.

 

[Techwatcher]

Your data is being sold by Facebook, twitter and etc…but nobody seems to care about them.

I see critical thinking is not popular in here.

 

[Will Co]

I mean I know he says that, but the law is pretty clear, and the Apple and Google can’t just ignore the law. While I know he can give them an extension, based on the text of the law I’m not sure he can without lying to Congress.

So, no problem then. Lying is his nature. It seems to be literally the only thing he does with any consistency.

 

[contacos]

You don’t know what literally or sell mean do you?

"Literally" has been used as an intensifier in English for several centuries, though recently this has been considered somewhat controversial by language prescriptivists or randoms on the Internet.

From Cambridge dictionary:
informal
used to emphasize what you are saying:

And in terms of sell, it was put in " for a reason

 

[Will Co]

Most companies don't sell data - that's what is valuable. The use the data to sell 'access' to users through their own ad platforms (facebook, X, google etc.). Most data hacks aren't from social media companies. They're from telcos and banks and other non-tech companies you deal with ona day-to-day basis.

I'd love to see some evidence for that statement "..most data hacks aren't from social media companies...". I'm not claiming it's wrong... but what are the sources that support that statement?

 

[Will Co]

Literally every free app is selling your data one way or another and also, it can only "sell", what you expose to the app in the first place. It's also understandable that they don't want to just hand over their algorithm

It's not that clear cut. Apps can expose anything they can get hold of from your device. That includes the information that you directly enter, but depending on permissions given, other less direct information, such as perhaps your location or other device specific information that might be correlated with other information available from other sources and used to profile or track you. In some cases, if those apps are abiding by the AppStore rules, that collection might be fairly light, but other apps that might be deliberately doing bad things in contravention of the rules (and have not been spotted doing it).. They could be be digging very deeply into your device.

 

[contacos]

It's not that clear cut. Apps can expose anything they can get hold of from your device. That includes the information that you directly enter, but depending on permissions given, other less direct information, such as perhaps your location or other device specific information that might be correlated with other information available from other sources and used to profile or track you. In some cases, if those apps are abiding by the AppStore rules, that collection might be fairly light, but other apps that might be deliberately doing bad things in contravention of the rules (and have not been spotted doing it).. They could be be digging very deeply into your device.

In a perfect world, the AppStore wouldn't even approve Apps which are doing this. No matter in what territory

 

[DMG35]

That's not quite the same. It's like complaining of government overreach because they removed asbestos from old buildings or lead from paint.

Id argue if the government, current or impending had any balls they would have gone after every social media app, Billionaires be damned. But they won't because they won't bite the hand that feeds them.

You're really gonna compare removing carcinogens from old buildings to the removal of an app? Let's just let the Govt regulate the entire internet while we are at it. The guys in Washington are never EVER lobbied by billionaires to do things in their best interests. The people in Washington always 100% have our best interests in mind 🙄

It is absolutely 100% Govt overreach. They should not be able to tell free citizens what they can and can't do on their phones unless it is explicitly against the law. Their job isn't to nanny the American people. They are our employees, but many of them seem to think they are our rulers.

 

[Mrkevinfinnerty]

You're really gonna compare removing carcinogens from old buildings to the removal of an app? Let's just let the Govt regulate the entire internet while we are at it. The guys in Washington are never EVER lobbied by billionaires to do things in their best interests. The people in Washington always 100% have our best interests in mind 🙄

It is absolutely 100% Govt overreach. They should not be able to tell free citizens what they can and can't do on their phones unless it is explicitly against the law. Their job isn't to nanny the American people. They are our employees, but many of them seem to think they are our rulers.

What Apple do with the App Store is overreach also. They often tell free American citizens what they can and can't do on their phones.

I agree about Tiktok btw.

 

[hagjohn]

I see critical thinking is not popular in here.

You want to block TikTok so China doesn't get our data but you leave all other other sites open to sell their data to China, hence, you have accomplished nothing. Yes, critical thinking is not popular here. If you truly believe China should not get our data, then you block all companies from selling our data.

 

[CheffyDude]

TikTok had a iPad app?

 

[xJustxMegx]

I can't wait till the EU follows by blocking TikTok. Why do we need to have so much from China? To spy on us? To start a new world war?

 

[SteveLV702]

Well in other countries I wouldn’t say fully functional. As I am in Lima, Peru yet I cannot access from iOS App, Android App or Web browser.

Didn’t know Peru (South America) was subject to US Laws & Regulations…

 

[SteveLV702]

Next to be banned….

iPhones themselves, TVs, and everything else MADE IN CHINA. They are spying on us…

Wonder if Congress knows that 98% of everything in their house is made in China and is spying on them.

 

[mansplains]

We should outlaw the sale of our data without opt-in explicit consent across the board.

Would you agree that accepting ToS counts as explicit consent? They have privacy policies as well.

 

[emmab2006]

If only our Government in the U.K would do this kind of thing as well. TikTok is a massive security risk to any nation. We banned huawei , lets hope we do the same with TikTok. i am the only person in my family to outright refuse to use this platform. going to the extreme as to blocking it on my network using PI-Hole. good riddence to bad photons!!!

 

[Krizoitz]

"Literally" has been used as an intensifier in English for several centuries, though recently this has been considered somewhat controversial by language prescriptivists or randoms on the Internet.

From Cambridge dictionary:
informal
used to emphasize what you are saying:

And in terms of sell, it was put in " for a reason

Except NEITHER usage is true.