• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The TikTok Flip-Flop

Safe-Keeper said:
Must be tiresome to be a Drumpf cultist. Imagine having to constantly check what the Führer wants, tirelessly arguing for that position online and with family, friends, and co-workers, and then have to do a 180 whenever he changes his mind on something. I imagine that tomorrow a lot of office workers are going to hear Ron raving about how great it is that God-Emperor Drumpf has become President just in time to save the social media app Ron has probably been ranting about and wanted banned for months.
Click to expand...
There's going to be a lot of overtime work at the Ministry of Truth.
 
Can the President undoing by a law passed by Congress and upheld unanimously by the Supreme Court by issuing an Executive Order?

If so, what's the point of Congress or the Supreme Court?
 
Andy_Ross said:
Can the President undo[] ... a law passed by Congress and upheld unanimously by the Supreme Court by issuing an Executive Order?
Click to expand...
The executive branch is responsible for enforcing the law. The executive can effectively negate a law by simply not enforcing it. In states that have legalized cannabis use, for example, ongoing federal prohibitions are not enforced except on federally-controlled property such as national parks. This is considered a compassionate relaxation of what would ordinarily be a case of federal supremacy. In political science terms, the executive is an elected political branch of government. People elect one candidate over the other to an executive office with the expectation of achieving a policy goal that may include discretion in enforcing some laws more or less vigorously than others.

While the notion of prosecutorial discretion is meant to provide a certain desirable flexibility, it's obvious that it can be (and has been) used for corrupt, personal, and political purposes. Ostensibly a misuse of executive discretion would be grounds for impeachment. But now as we witness more and more gross abuses of executive power, you can sense how frustrated some Americans have become with both their elected leaders and with the system that seems to allow such abuses with growing impunity.

ETA: However, in this case the extension at the discretion of the President is expressly allowed by the law, which I should have found and read before writing this post. See https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-118publ50/uslm/PLAW-118publ50.xml , Division H § 2(a)(3), which states, "With respect to a foreign adversary controlled application, the President may grant a 1-time extension of not more than 90 days with respect to the date on which this subsection would otherwise apply to such application pursuant to paragraph (2)," and then goes on to state the conditions under which the President could grant the extension.

Andy_Ross said:
If so, what's the point of Congress or the Supreme Court?
Click to expand...
At the pedantic level, Congress is still needed to actually make the law. The executive has discretion to enforce the laws that exist, but cannot enforce laws that do not exist. But you are not very far off when you point out that the emerging political crisis in the United States seems to be trending toward an absolute monarchy.

By design a court can issue a writ of mandamus to correct what it deems to be an abuse of discretion. Inferior courts have the power to direct officers to compel other officers to carry out their duty. But the Supreme Court famously has no power to enforce any of its orders.

As a practical matter, law enforcement has always had broad discretion to structure a program of compliance with the cooperation of the errant party. For example, Boeing is currently under a deferred prosecution program as part of an effort to correct its lapses in quality and compliance with federal regulation. What almost-President Trump has done is simply agree to defer enforcement for a determined period of time in order to secure compliance in an ostensibly amicable fashion. This happens all the time in the U.S. in a regulatory context. If my company, for example, is found to be out of compliance with regulation, we are not generally shut down immediately. For all but the most egregious violations, there is usually a deferral of further enforcement while we work with regulators and enforcement officers to return to compliance.
 
Last edited:
Norman Alexander said:
The free speech stuff is just a decoy. The critical issue is the app collects data from phones worldwide and sends it to somewhere that can use that data for their own purposes. Doesn't matter if you watch cute kittens or insurrection material or hard raunch on tik tok. That's just window dressing.
Click to expand...
Just like all social media and many other apps as well. Why is this only an issue with Tik Tok?
 
ponderingturtle said:
Just like all social media and many other apps as well. Why is this only an issue with Tik Tok?
Click to expand...
Because the other ones just mine data for the profit of billionaires and their companies, this one mines data for billionaires and an antagonistic rival nation.
 
TragicMonkey said:
Because the other ones just mine data for the profit of billionaires and their companies, this one mines data for billionaires and an antagonistic rival nation.
Click to expand...
But they can just buy the data, it is freely for sale after all. Like how a Target contacted women letting them know they knew they were pregnant even if they had not told anyone yet.

Forbes link
 
TragicMonkey said:
A burglar can break a window and get in, that doesn't mean we should leave the front door unlocked and open.
Click to expand...
But shouldn't you make the act of burglary illegal instead of banning Chinese people from your neighborhood? I mean it isn't the act that they take issue with but who is doing it after all.
 
ponderingturtle said:
But they can just buy the data, it is freely for sale after all. Like how a Target contacted women letting them know they knew they were pregnant even if they had not told anyone yet.

Forbes link
Click to expand...
Exactly! The data collection issue is a complete canard. Tiktok can't collect any more data than any other social media app and all of that is publicly available for sale. If the chinese government wants it, they can easily buy it, just you or I can.

The real issue with Tiktok which most people seem to be missing is the ability to manipulate public opinion through its algorithm. The CCP can exercise direct control over any company in China so its conceivable that they could use the app to manipulate the west in its favour. That is many orders of magnitude more dangerous than any data collection and a completely legitimate reason to ban the app.
 
LiteBright said:
Exactly! The data collection issue is a complete canard. Tiktok can't collect any more data than any other social media app and all of that is publicly available for sale. If the chinese government wants it, they can easily buy it, just you or I can.

The real issue with Tiktok which most people seem to be missing is the ability to manipulate public opinion through its algorithm. The CCP can exercise direct control over any company in China so its conceivable that they could use the app to manipulate the west in its favour. That is many orders of magnitude more dangerous than any data collection and a completely legitimate reason to ban the app.
Click to expand...
And why other nations should ban X, as they don't want to give a foreign national(Musk) that kind of power. Social media should be strictly demarcated by nation. I mean we already have Facebook complicity in genocide after all, not that people actually care.
 
whatever the reason for a tik tok ban, which imo is needed along with the rest of those poisonous apps, it’s not in service to the public interest and is pretty unlikely to accidentally work out that way. whatever legitimate argument you could make either way isn’t one being made to anyone involved with it
 
ponderingturtle said:
And why other nations should ban X, as they don't want to give a foreign national(Musk) that kind of power. Social media should be strictly demarcated by nation. I mean we already have Facebook complicity in genocide after all, not that people actually care.
Click to expand...
I'm honestly not sure what the answer is. We've entered a brave new world where mass communication and tools of mass manipulation are available to everyone, including bad actors. I don't know how we close pandora's box.
 
Why isn't Trump just buying TikTok by Decree ?
Nationalise it and instantly sell it on to himself for a whopping $1 .
 
LiteBright said:
Exactly! The data collection issue is a complete canard. Tiktok can't collect any more data than any other social media app and all of that is publicly available for sale.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure it is. I agree that any app can collect the same user data as TikTok does, but I'm not sure it follows that other apps are offering for sale everything that they have. The only reliable way to get the kind of information you think is valuable to your enterprise is to collect it yourself.

LiteBright said:
The real issue with Tiktok which most people seem to be missing is the ability to manipulate public opinion through its algorithm.
Click to expand...
I think this is really the only reason China collects so much data on ordinary Americans. Yes, there was the fear that allowing TikTok on computers operated by U.S. government agencies or employees and officers might give China direct access to what those people are doing. But I think the "vast swaths" of data are being used most directly to tune and evaluate the manipulation efforts.

Normally even this would be allowed under the First Amendment. People who speak are allowed to attempt to use speech to influence others. But the clincher in this case is the determination that China is a foreign adversary. This creates a special characteristic of the speaker that carves out an exception to normal First Amendment protection.

LiteBright said:
The CCP can exercise direct control over any company in China so it's conceivable that they could use the app to manipulate the west in its favour. That is many orders of magnitude more dangerous than any data collection and a completely legitimate reason to ban the app.
Click to expand...
This is why I don't trust Trump's proposed solution of joint ownership. It doesn't ring true. If the supposed commercial value of TikTok is its algorithm—which China will not export—and the solution is apparently a joint venture between an American company and a Chinese company, and China maintains control over and access to the data of any Chinese company, how does the proposed solution secure American citizens' data and avoid manipulation by a Chinese adversary? It really does seem to be more about the money than anything else. Or as an economist and lawyer I consulted last night put it, "It's just protectionism wrapped in national security theater."
 
ponderingturtle said:
But shouldn't you make the act of burglary illegal instead of banning Chinese people from your neighborhood? I mean it isn't the act that they take issue with but who is doing it after all.
Click to expand...
It's both. Why is it a problem to acknowledge that China doesn't have America's best interests at heart? They don't pretend we do for them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom