Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
The last word was spoken. This happened by a law, passed by Congress and signed by a president. There are two paths from here.

The first path means Congress repeals the law which implies that they are complaining about national security (instead of Meta’s failure to compete) was a lie.

The other is that Trump simply refuses to enforce the law (but expects companies to still carry that cloud of liability over them which they would never do because one tantrum from him puts them in a financial position), which undermines every time he has ever complained about his predecessors not enforcing a law.
So in other words - the last word is t spoken yet…
 
  • Like
Reactions: SanderEvers
Looks like it’s going away if they don’t sell. Trump can’t override a law passed by Congress with executive action. It really played out like a game of seeing who would blink first between China and the US. I think they might reconsider selling now.

Biden already blinked. There is no reconsidering. China already doubled down passing a law preventing the algo from being exported and sold. Nobody will buy a shell of a company when the algo can simply be moved to a new app and get full traction.
 
I don't use TikTok, or X (or ever used twitter) or threads, or mastodon, or blue sky...so don't really care.

What I do care about is congress saying it's unsafe with a "trust me bro" instead of presenting, for everyone to see, exactly what the specific issues are, in detail.

That's all.
That's an issue but the SCOTUS unanimously upheld Congress's broadly bipartisan action as Constitutional. That doesn't address the details of the specific national security concerns, but it does suggest something is concerning. ByteDance and the U.S. government negotiated for years across multiple administrations without a clear resolution to the concerns. If this was more of a single party pushing for this, that's likely more of a "trust me, bro" situation.

Edit (not directed at who I was replying to): I recommend people commenting read the opinion(s). It's quite fascinating: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24-656_ca7d.pdf
 
Last edited:
Tracking people's browsing, mining their private data, and selling it should be illegal — full stop. Any app or website that does it should be shut down and, if the company behind it persists, it should be taken down, too.
that sure would be nice, and that would also shut the entire ad industry practically down, which would be fine by me, but, as I was told yesterday in a post here, ads tracking you is a useful “feature”
 
Meanwhile, TikTok users are moving to the new TikTok called Lemon 8 which is owned/operated by... TikTok 🤣


Yeah, when a company like this is subverting a ban and encouraging users to sign in to another app made by them, that wreaks of desperation. They want your data. They want the advertising money. The entire company's portfolio of apps should be shut down.
 
For the longest time, I had issues with a TikTok ban from a first amendment perspective. But I thought of an analogy that kinda made me change my mind.

Let’s say there was a bar in the United States, and a lot of people hang out at this bar with friends and socialize and have a good time. But then, you find out this bar is owned and operated by China. On top of that, you find out this bar is filled with Chinese spies who are eavesdropping on you and collecting your information.

The US government would have a right to shut this bar down. Right?
Interesting analogy. Whatever concerns you or someone else has about this ban from a First Amendment perspective, the ban was upheld unanimously by the Supreme Court as constitutional. If anyone still thinks it's against the First Amendment after their ruling, those people better have some solid reasoning and understanding of the Constitution and legal precedent that the 9 ideologically diverse Supreme Court justices (and all their clerks) didn't have. Sotomayor and Gorsuch wrote their own opinions where they offered different opinions about some matters, but they still concurred that the ban did not go against the First Amendment. ByteDance also failed along the way to have any judge buy their First Amendment arguments.

Put this all together, and it's a good sign that this ban is completely in line with the First Amendment.

Now whether banning was the correct thing to do, is a different matter. I like what Justice Gorsuch wrote in his concurring in judgment opinion: "Even what might happen next to TikTok remains unclear. See Tr. of Oral Arg. 146–147. But the question we face today is not the law’s wisdom, only its constitutionality."
 
Last edited:
Foreign adversary. What a load of nonsense.

Either way this will be good for the world - social media is a curse and should be binned as a failed experiment.
 
Anyone that uses a social media app to the point where they are brainwashed by a foreign government has serious issues. And anyone that thinks this is worse than Facebook, Twitter, etc., should contemplate where the data is going and what it's used for.

I feel sorry for America.
Those companies aren’t owned and operated by a totalitarian foreign adversary.
 
The company is valued at $50Bn, not “hundreds of billions.”
The $50 billion value you see is only for TikTok's U.S. operations and excludes their recommendation algorithm.

Thrown in the algorithm and you're looking at up to $200 billion.


How much is TikTok worth?

Wedbush analyst Dan Ives estimates TikTok is worth “well north of $100 billion” with the algorithm — and potentially up to $200 billion in a “best case scenario.”

“Without the algorithm it’s $40 billion to $50 billion,” Ives said, adding he does not believe that ByteDance and Beijing would sell TikTok with the algorithm.
 
Ignoring the China element, do we really know what these other services do with theirs?

The count of 3bn+ monthly Facebook users demonstrates that the majority of people globally simply don't care about privacy.
I think the issue is the confirmation that all Chinese owned companies must comply with the CCP. Not saying that’s any different than what all of the US companies do for the US Government. It’s sad what has happened to our data everywhere. From credit services to insurance, they all have spilled, been hacked or straight up sold our data. It’s money that wins. I mean this means more likely a US company can make a relevant replacement? But since it’s only US, the world won’t care and it will be just like China having a firewall not allowing their citizens to access US companies so their data isn’t sold.

I think it goes all ways. Personally, I think I like that it’s banned, but from a marketing and influencer standpoint a lot of people just got poorer. I suppose Zuckerberg wanted this, as did Microsoft and YouTube. These platforms will all try to be the next replacement in the US. Problem is in the US, all the money goes to shareholders not the people doing the work.
 
I mean they’ve refused so far to sell an app that would net them hundreds of billions of dollars, which, if a truly independent company exists to make money, is a pretty good indication that it’s an intelligence op the CCP is unwilling to give up. Imagine if the Soviet Union owned NBC in 1955. It’s the same idea and we’re not the only ones banning the app.
The US version of app wouldn't be worth more than $20B without the algo.
 
For the longest time, I had issues with a TikTok ban from a first amendment perspective. But I thought of an analogy that kinda made me change my mind.

Let’s say there was a bar in the United States, and a lot of people hang out at this bar with friends and socialize and have a good time. But then, you find out this bar is owned and operated by China. On top of that, you find out this bar is filled with Chinese spies who are eavesdropping on you and collecting your information.

The US government would have a right to shut this bar down. Right?
This bar would also be manipulating the views of the customers through the flyers posted on the walls and videos playing on the TVs.
 
Quick google search shows analysts estimating its value at well over $100b and possibly over $200b. Seems reasonable to guess that a sale would net hundreds of billions.
Those numbers assume worldwide users and the propriety algo, neither of which would be part of a US-owned platform.
 
Biden wanted to ban. Trump wants to ban. This is bipartisan and I dont know enough to know why. But TikTok has been demonstrated to be associated with decreasing pysch health in teenage girls so at the least it needs age restrictions.
 
Biden wanted to ban. Trump wants to ban. This is bipartisan and I dont know enough to know why. But TikTok has been demonstrated to be associated with decreasing pysch health in teenage girls so at the least it needs age restrictions.
TikTok has the same age restrictions (for ages 13 and up) as Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, Twitter/X, Pinterest, Reddit, Discord, Twitch, YouTube, etc all have.
 
Trump asked the Supreme Court to delay making a decision and to delay TikTok's ban, but the court declined to do so. It will be up to Trump's administration to enforce the law going forward, and there are avenues that would allow Trump to circumvent the Supreme Court's ruling so that TikTok remains operational, including an executive order that delays the ban.
Unfortunately there is nothing he really can do since this ban has super majority bipartisan support from congress and any executive order can basically be overridden by congressional action, which I believe they will in interest of national security.

China will likely retaliate hard against US with massive trade sanctions. Say goodbye to new Apple products because likely China will ban any exports to US as retaliation, and ban any US companies from doing business.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.