It takes a particular kind of brain rot to believe that people who don't live in america, and don't do the majority of their business in america, care more about influencing the american people than those who live in america and do the majority of their business in america.

The ban is for the interests of politicians who want to stop the discorse happening on tiktok, and tech companies who want to run a shortform video site and have been unsuccessful in creating their own.

If tiktok is doing what they are accused of, reasonable legislation would ban that practice. When the bill is written to try and let google or facebook buy a successful implementation of shortform video, you know you have an entirely corrupt government.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Exactly! The biggest documented case of foreign influence on Americans happened through Meta’s Facebook, a US company now cozying up to the incoming administration. This isn’t about security—it’s about protecting monopolies and silencing competition. Real concern would mean regulating behavior, not banning rivals.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (3 children)

As a democracy, its probably a bad idea to have one of your biggest content-distribution-algorithm controlled by an antagonistic Nation.

[–] Hildegarde 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

as a democratic nation its probably a bad idea to allow a small number of businesses to control content distribution. Apps should be regulated based on their actions and practices, not national origin.

disinformation does not become a good thing when produced domestically.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

Yea, there do be more than one problem, but it's a start

load more comments (1 replies)