
TikTok’s Chinese owner offers to forego stake to clinch U.S. deal – sources - clashmeifyoucan
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-tiktok-bytedance-exclusive-idUSKBN24X3SK
======
billfruit
As someone from the third world this leaves a very bad feeling if it happens.
I do expect it runs into legal hurdles before that.

Neither Apple nor Google have found TikTok problematic enough to delist them
from their app stores. Neither is there charges that TikTok may have broken US
laws.

Banning something which hasn't broken US laws, on arbitrary grounds shouldn't
be possible.

The President shouldn't have authority to ban anything at all let alone an app
available through privately operated app stores.

Also dictating which apps an individual can install/not install shouldn't be
the job of the Federal Government.

All indication is that the president does not have authority to execute an
outright ban of the thing.

Also what alarms me the veil of secrecy on the procedings. The proceeding of
the CFIUS should be made public in this regard.

At this point US is seemingly acting like a dictatorship with very less
transparency.

Policies and decisions should be debated and argued before they are executed,
not merely justified after the fact. That's what US and a few oher democracies
have turned to doing in recent years.

Ultimately I feel that it is US who has been more to blame (contrary to much
of Western media coverage) for the deteriorating US-China relationship, and
drumming up the chorus for a new coldwar. Chinese policy seems to have not
significantly changed in the last 5 years towards the US, but on the other
hand US seemed ever more keen and eger to pursue a hostile attitude towards
China.

With the pandemic and with genral economic malice affecting much of the world,
I don't think a path of increasing hostility and conflict is what the world
needs.

~~~
albacur
> _Chinese policy seems to have not significantly changed in the last 5 years
> towards the US, but on the other hand US seemed ever more keen and eger to
> pursue a hostile attitude towards China._

For decades, China has blocked U.S. companies from fair competition, reneged
on trade deals when it suits them, backed out of industrial partnerships after
extracting the IP it deems useful, and generally been a bad trade partner.

I agree that the president shouldn't have authority to arbitrarily block a
product or company (and ultimately he doesn't, he'll need broader support
among elected officials), but it's absurd to suggest that the U.S. should
blindly accept hostile behavior for decades on end without reacting, or else
itself be labeled "hostile."

~~~
wildrhythms
The rationale in your comment is unconvincing to me. If Tiktok is breaking the
law, that should come to light and be actioned like any other company breaking
the law; likewise TOS violations on respective app stores. I haven't seen any
reports to suggest that Tiktok is breaking U.S. law, have you? And if the
rationale is, as you suggested, a retaliation against 'bad behavior for
decades', what precedent would banning Tiktok set for other non-U.S. owned
apps and services?

~~~
albacur
My comment wasn't specific to TikTok, but rather OP's assertion that the U.S.
is a hostile actor, whereas China is just being China.

Regarding TikTok, foreign-owned companies must follow U.S. laws, which are
subject to due process. Additionally, they must not pose an imminent threat to
national security. For better or worse, the government tends to be tight-
lipped about matters of national security and isn't compelled to divulge
details to the public. Normally, this is acceptable because we trust our
government to act responsibility and in our best interest. Is TikTok a
legitimate threat to security? I don't know, and with Trump's tendency to make
everything look like a publicity stunt, my trust in the government to use its
power responsibly is not very high.

~~~
jewelry
Cannot believe the president has the power without legal battle to ban
business activity. If it's national security, let out the cat. Otherwise how
could people believe if this won't happen to SAP, Volkswagon, Sony next time.

~~~
Alupis
> Cannot believe the president has the power without legal battle to ban
> business activity.

I didn't think State Governor's could ban legitimate business activity until
very recently either.

~~~
wpurvis
If your legitimate business activity undermines public health it is no longer
legitimate until the threat has passed. We fought this out in 1918 as well.

~~~
Alupis
The problem is determining what is a public health problem.

Ice cream parlors? Are they necessary? No, but they're allowed to be open.

Hair cutting? Closed. Restaurants to-go food and alcohol? Open. Bars? Closed.
Hiking trails? Open. Camping? Closed.

Very little makes sense, and almost all of it is political.

If the Government wants to prevent you from operating your otherwise legal and
legitimate business, they should have to pay you for lost revenue.

~~~
wpurvis
Can your business take precautions to prevent the spread of an active
pandemic? Good you get to stay open. Can your business take precautions, but
isn't? You get to close. Does the nature of your business make it impossible
to function with social distancing/masks? You get to close.

That's how it's been done in my state, and we've done very well compared to
the rest of the nation. If we (nationwide) had actually shut down in the
beginning instead of half-assing it we wouldn't be where we are now.

------
volgo
The interesting thing is that these platforms come and go. One year it’s Vine,
another year it’s Snap, now it’s TikTok. ByteDance bought musically for $1B in
2017 and turned it into Tok.

3 years later, it’s grown like crazy because it’s the latest fad and would be
smart for them to cash out before the next new thing hits

The whole divestment thing is probably a godsend for ByteDance, “forcing” them
to liquidate their stake, but in reality let’s them cash out on an overhyped
app that’s easy to copy

Must be laughing all the way to the bank

~~~
patrickaljord
TikTok is not overhyped, it is here to stay, that's why they want to ban it.
It's still growing like crazy and is way way more entertaining than any other
social network by a long shot.

~~~
dkersten
> it is here to stay

That's what I heard about plenty of social platforms like this. Everyone
thought Vine was here to stay too. Everyone thought Myspace was here to stay.
Snapchat was huge at one point and now I no longer know anybody who still uses
it. Maybe it will be like Facebook, but there's a big chance it won't. It's
huge now, but its still relatively niche appeal in the grand scheme of tings.
These things appear to be fickle. We will see.

~~~
trca
Just because you don't know anyone that uses Snapchat doesn't make that an
authoritative source on popularity of a company. Snap's user base has grown
consistently and show's no signs of slowing down, even against increase
competition in the space
([https://www.statista.com/statistics/545967/snapchat-app-
dau/](https://www.statista.com/statistics/545967/snapchat-app-dau/)). TikTok
is the "Vine replacement" since Vine was bought by Twitter and shutdown. Vine
wasn't a "fad" that faded away, it was actively shutdown by its parent
company, likely would still exist to this day in a non-insignificant way had
that not happen.

~~~
skohan
Why did twitter shut it down?

~~~
giancarlostoro
They never monetized it despite Vine getting people to join Twitter.

------
pknerd
US is doing with China what China did with them. American VCs and business men
used to criticize and mock Chinese government for it. Since US is following
the footsteps of China, I wonder whether Chinese will be doing what US VCs
did?

~~~
RavlaAlvar
If US successfully force China to open market, that would be a win for
everyone. Of course though, this situation would only occur in fantasy land.

~~~
robert_foss
Thinking that US market forces will open the chinese market after decades of
failing to have that effect seems rather naive.

~~~
jariel
It's not 'US market forces' that will open China, and it never was.

It was the opportunity to expand into global economic markets, with a certain
perspective in mind, ballpark along the lines of Western Liberal Democracy and
Economy.

The Asian countries that followed this path after WW2 were enormously
succesfull: South Korea, Japan, Singapore, Hong Kong, Taiwan.

They are basically beacons of prosperity surrounded by economic mayhem.

China chose 'it's own path' \- which is fine - and there are probably many
advantages to the central planning early on (those other nations did that,
Korea was an authoritarian state and then opened eventually, kind of 'part of
a plan') - but of course the CCP has another agenda, they don't want to cede
power, and China has a different historical view of itself which is not just a
function of CCP propaganda.

I think it is literally at this very point wherein the 'advantage' of
autocracy is starting to be a disadvantage, and that a degree of opening up
would actually beneficial.

Basically - once you get the 'easy investments' done - like roads, bridges,
and you succesfull rip off everyone else's IP and are 'to some extent caught
up' \- then the plan starts to falter. At some point, you have to 'lead' \-
and it takes a different kind of approach. At least in many areas, though we
should not underestimate them.

There are no obvious economic choices for China now and their 'old plan' won't
work. Putting Uyghers in jail, grabbing S. China sea, getting into pissing
matches with India and Japan - none of this will bear fruits.

The 'Belt and Road' is actually one 'grand strategy' that a central power like
China could have that America could never have (takes a couple decades of
consistent vision) - but it seems that the heavy handedness and deep
corruption of the system won't allow for it.

Geopolitically, people 'love to hate on America' in the press and in
propaganda, but when 'push comes to shove' there is nobody who doesn't
understand what side they would rather be on, both pragmatically and for the
sake of the good of everyone.

Though Trump is a dufous and blow-hard (sorry), he is actually the only
Western leader with the 'crazy like a fox' to take on China, and he's
absolutely right to ban TikTok and other entities.

Basically - the West needs to apply trade rules with China that are exactly
tit for tat: China doesn't allow foreign competition in certain areas - then
we ban that. They don't allow ownership, then we ban that. They have a lot of
controls over content, then we do as well - we ban everything remotely related
to the Chinese state. They require foreign companies to fork over IP, and then
give it to local champions - then we do as well.

Imagine how the world would react if the US required Huawei to give up all
it's IP, held it up in bureaucracy for years, while they gave the IP to Cisco,
and then the Treasury and the Fed financed Cisco and their international
customers, while the US diplomatic corps acted both as a sales team for Cisco,
and did economic espionage to thwart competitors outright?

That would be 'fair'.

There is a Canadian company [1] that lost a contract to the Canadian
government for airport scanners - the Chinese bid was 25% lower. The complaint
was that the Canadian company would never be allowed to bid on such a
sensitive contract in China, moreover, there were state subsidies. How on
earth is this fair or free trade? It's not. If China won't allow external
bidders for airport security tools - we don't allow them either.

It's really almost a paradox to understand why even China has been able to
maintain such a lop-sided advantage.

It started 30 years ago, when China was so poor that the West basically
accepted the asymmetrical terms of trade. Like a frog in cool water that's
getting warmer never thinks to jump out - Western entities have not been able
to 'get it together' to change the terms. China has been acting very
aggressively against anyone who speaks out, and of course, we have the useful
idiots in the West who will proclaim that any antagonism towards China must be
'racism' etc..

It's just only right now starting to cross a tipping point wherein you see
bits of world leaders actually starting to push back collectiely. Merkel or
Trudeau might say one small thing, then they see the reaction, then others
will say something else.

COVID and the China coverup has presented basically a catalyst for this,
wherein it has been fully legit to publicly criticise China because they did
act poorly and it cost ostensibly a lot of lives.

Though the Dems actually have not really been against Trump's China
aggression, they may not be likely to spearhead it. They are just far to
'systematically naive'. Even if many Dems individually realise what needs to
be done - they do not, organisationally, have the political will. Biden might
say a few things here and there, but the momentum is unlikely to continue. It
takes a certain kind of 'political courage' and consistently so - with a lot
of people on board to re-articulate the relationship with China - I'm wary
that Biden & his team will be able to do it. Their economic team I feel just
won't have enough true hardball players and I don't mean 'jerks for the sake
of being jerks' \- I mean 'realpolitik' players who can apply the hard rules
necessary with China, that would otherwise seem out of place in a modern
world.

Have a quick glance at the difference between Obama/Trump trade advisors
Froman [2] and Navarro [3]. Night and Day. (FYI I'm not saying I support
either, just highlighting the difference)

[1] [https://nationalpost.com/news/chinese-government-owned-
firm-...](https://nationalpost.com/news/chinese-government-owned-firm-
wins-6-8m-contract-to-supply-security-equipment-to-canada-embassies)

[2]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Froman](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Froman)

[3]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Navarro](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Navarro)

~~~
moneywoes
Not sure why you're getting down voted but does anything genuinely think trade
has been fair for the US, Canada and China? Would love to hear the opposing
side.

~~~
pasabagi
I also like the grandparent post, but I'll take a crack at presenting _an_
opposing side. The idea of a lopsided trading relationship, with the US being
the losers, and China the winners, seems a bit dubious to me. Chinese
companies work because they have cheap labour, a lot of talent, and massive
economies of scale. Blaming the demise of US industry on China is absurd - US
industry started declining in the 80's, because neo-liberal economics
basically amounts to industrial sabotage on the policy level. Every country
that went hard neoliberal has very little industry today, while the few that
didn't (Germany, France, Japan) still have very competitive industry.

The idea of unfair trade is also a bit of a mercantilist trope, so I'm not
sure it makes sense on its own terms - but at the very least, it's normally
something that requires an unequal relationship between trading partners.
Like, I think it would be fair to say that trade deals between first and third
world nations are often unfair, because there are ample opportunities for one
party to lean on the other. This obviously isn't so between the US and China.
If there are conditions that favour Chinese companies, it's because of
policies that were, at the time, thought to benefit the US - and which
probably do benefit the US, at least insofar as GDP growth is concerned (the
US has remained pretty good in this arena).

Trump's whole schtick of 'bring back coal' comes to mind here. Obviously, you
could hammer out a trade agreement that would end up with coal mines reopening
in Wyoming, with steelworks in Pittsburgh - but would it actually help the US?

As for the whole question of whether or not China is 'playing dirty', or
muscling their way through established norms, I think it's obviously not the
case - or at least, it's by no means the case that China plays more dirty than
anybody else - least of all the US.

I think the politics of China do deserve a great deal of scrutiny, and if
there's something that the west should be putting pressure on them for, it's
the slide into totalitarianism we've witnessed over the last few years.
However, all the stuff about trade seems two parts grandstanding and one part
hypocrisy.

~~~
jariel
I'll answer the question in a more standard way, and disagree with your points
along the way.

'Fair Trade' does not have to be 'Trade on Equal Terms'.

That is how the relationship started: China was 'very poor' and so the
asymmetrical trade rules made sense. Pepsi and Coke and a few others had
access to China market, people 'looked the other way' at the IP issues.

But in 2020, China is in a different situation, and the asymmetrical rules are
basically 'not fair'.

"The idea of unfair trade is also a bit of a mercantilist trope,"

This is false.

If one nation is allowed to sell into the other, but does not allow the other
to sell to it - this is 'unfair trade'. Blatantly.

If one nation uses state subsidies to support fledgling industries, so that
they can dump on foreign markets and 'take over the global industry' \- this
is obviously unfair trade. China did this with Solar Panel market -
subsidising their industry to flood America with cheap products, putting
everyone out of business etc.. This is not a 'new' idea, these concepts have
been well understood for hundreds of years.

"Blaming the demise of US industry on China is absurd "

Nobody is 'blaming' US economic issues on the US. What I'm articulating is
that China is effectively 'cheating' (or rather, has an obvious upper hand)
and it needs to be rectified.

"As for the whole question of whether or not China is 'playing dirty', or
muscling their way through established norms, I think it's obviously not the
case - or at least, it's by no means the case that China plays more dirty than
anybody else - least of all the US."

This is again false. We can call it 'dirty' or not - but China plays
'extremely protectionalist' first off, second, they have state intervention,
which is not suitable for trade.

There are a million and one things that the US cannot do in China, but that
China can do in the US. This is blatantly lop-sided. The US should apply the
same rules to China as China does to the US.

Second, and more nuanced, is the state intervention. Again, the example:

Imagine if the US forced Huawei to give designs and IP over to Cisco, and the
US Pres had direct authority over major banks, ordered JP Morgan to finance
Cisco buyers in Brasil, Germany etc. - and for liquidity, ordered the US
Federal Reserve to print money for that purpose. It sounds incredibly bizarre,
right? Well that's what China does today!

So it's fine for them to play the game they want to play, but the West needs
to respond in kind.

This has little to do with 'bringing back coal mines' obviously. But it may
have something to do with bringing back manufacturing - in a highly automated
way.

"about trade seems two parts grandstanding and one part hypocrisy."

No it's not, generally speaking the US is pretty good on these things, and has
fostered a lot of very important international agreements and ideas along
these lines as well. Of course, trade really does benefit the US a lot, so
it's to a great extent self interest, but still.

The world needs to trade with China on somewhat different terms.

------
brandonmenc
Future startup biz strategy:

Chinese company makes huge viral app for the US market, and lets everyone
stoke rumors that it's a spying platform. US gov't tosses a huge subsidy at
whatever domestic company can acquire it _at any cost_ \- in the interest of
national defense - resulting in massive overvalued purchase. China pockets the
profits. Rinse, repeat.

~~~
smilekzs
But isn't it more likely that said Chinese company will have little to none
leverage in the talks, because the choice is between getting banned or getting
bought at a token (read: undervalued) price?

~~~
Spivak
Potentially but their negotiating position is shutting down completely which
would be a loss for a potential acquiring company. I'm sure that TT stole some
users from YT, IG, and Tumblr but largely creators are posting everywhere so
their existence just increases the size of the pie.

------
MangoCoffee
Some people here think TikTok is a fad. I used to think FB is a fad but 16
years later. FB is still here. Not as shiny as it used to be but enough to
make billions.

I don't know if TikTok is a fad and you don't either. If TikTok last more than
10 years. It already make back its cost and some more.

Heck, Snap is still around and it used to be a meme stock on WallStreetBets.

~~~
Latty
I'm always suspicious of anyone who says "this is a fad" who treats the thing
with disdain. If you don't understand what people like about the thing, it
seems unlikely you will be able to identify if that desire is going to fade
quickly.

------
schuke
I wonder if anyone know that TikTok is currently actively blocking access from
Chinese users. Even with a US Apple ID, even with a VPN/Shadowsocks service,
you cannot sign up TikTok as long as your phone is using a Chinese SIM card. I
have to use an iPad.

What you have is something the internet has never seen: unlike Google having
to censor its content within China, you now have a allegedly independent US
company actively censoring the Chinese people on a social network that
identifies itself as non-political, on US (or Free World) soil.

This is a type of censorship that's far worse than anything Google or Yahoo or
Microsoft ever had to do. Imagine more and more Chinese-owned companies doing
this world wide. This is just absolutely ugly practice that shouldn't be
allowed to proliferate.

It's not only a national security issue. It's also a human rights hazard.

~~~
fermienrico
Umm...there is nothing remarkable about this. CCP wants their citizens to use
a vetted service, that’s in full control and has surveillance capabilities.

They already ban YouTube, Google, Facebook, Instagram, etc. amongst many other
sites.

Tiktok has a local version for Chinese users I believe and Tiktok wants to
make sure Chinese users do not sign up for international version of Tiktok
app.

Tiktok is owned by ByteDance which is not a US firm. It’s based in China.

Am I missing something?

~~~
schuke
They used to do this within Chinese jurisdiction. Now they're doing it on
United State soil.

~~~
tom-_-
FB, Google etc are also blocked when using a Chinese telecom's SIM card on "US
soil" so what is the difference here?

~~~
schuke
TikTok blocks itself. Others are blocked by the government. Name another major
application/social network that does the same?

~~~
tom-_-
I don't know of any but I also wouldn't be surprised if there were. The NBA
and American movie production companies already censor in the US as concession
to access the Chinese markets. Not arguing this is a good thing mind you, just
that it may not be unprecedented.

------
chvid
Great policy. The EU needs to do the same with American big tech.

~~~
jariel
If the EU banned American big tech, they'd be set aback 20 years. Of course
where would be a populist revolution.

The difference between the EU and US on this matter, is that the EU has almost
no substitutes, and they just don't - for whatever reason (there are many)
have he will to do them.

And of course there's no point - what FB is doing is no different from what a
EU-based FB would do.

~~~
chenzhekl
Do you really think EU is not capable of creating similar services?

~~~
admin_account
From a technical standpoint, no. From a cultural standpoint, yes.

------
AnonymousRider
Tired of the apologists for China. They have been taking advantage of our
Western tradition of openness for far too long.

------
quantum_state
The government's behavior should not be allowed in a country of rule of law.
We should all wake up to defend our God given right to use apps we like. Guys,
please don't fall into the trap of us vs them. The governments are all
bullying us, the people. They raised tariff in the name of whatever, yet in
reality, they collect more tax and we pay more for goods we need. The same
goes with banning apps. The reality is that we are being stripped away more
and more choices and freedom. So, we the people need to wake up and stand
against it!

~~~
nouveaux
Or people need to wake up to the security threat.

This is not about us vs them. No apps from Australia, Europe or Africa are on
the list of banned apps. Its China where in order to do business there, you
have to give the government access to your trade secrets and full server
access without a warrant.

While its possible for any company to succumb to government pressure for
unreasonable access, it is a prerequisite to do so in China. The world knows
this.

Hong Kong's new national security law is plenty proof that China is not a
genuine partner and is a bad faith actor. Your right to look at TikTok videos
does not trump anyone else's right for security.

~~~
horsemessiah
The solution would be to pass a law akin to the GDPR then. There is no need to
go through executive action.

The U.S. is not supposed to be authoritarian like China is.

~~~
0xy
GDPR wouldn't block Tik Tok's data extraction practices, nor is it effective
legislation at all.

GDPR is simply EU tech protectionism, nothing more. All it gave consumers was
infuriating cookie nag screens.

GDPR utterly failed to prevent data brokers from operating with impunity in
Germany and other EU nations. Your cell phone location data is still openly
sold when you live in the EU. It's useless.

------
mrtksn
As I currently recide in a country famous for blocking access to websites, I
follow these developments as closely as I can.

Whatever happens, it's probably going to be a recipe on how to force all
foreign providers to act the way the local government wants. These days the
theme is forcing on the ant-gay stance, they managed to force Netflix a show
that had a gay character in it. Besides that charade, they passed laws to
control the social media in the name of national security and citizens rights.
This comes after Twitter exposed and deleted a pro government troll army.

Anyway, if this happens Facebook, Google, Twitter etc. can start looking into
the future of Instagram for Iran, Twitter for Turkey, Google for EU - all
forced to partner with a local company and the global versions inaccessible.

I am sure that the US ban of TikTok would be well rationalised but the US
could have chosen the EU approach of enforcing US data being kept on US soil.
Sad that US choose the Chinese approach of right our of banning(because
somehow becoming like China is the way of topping the authoritarian Chinese
order). Something tells me that this is not about national security.

Welcome to the world of partitioned internet in the name of national security.
A boring dystopia where the less fre world no longer has a role model.

I hope you enjoy the life where the government is telling you what you can and
can't use so that the country stays safe. Brilliant system that served all
kind of authoritarian regimes.

Good luck to the start-ups, from now on you are looking to a future where you
will have to strike a deal with each country you want to operate.

"Your app just crossed the TOP100 mark in the AppStore, would be shame if
something happens to it because of national security. Maybe you should sell it
to our crony while it's still worth something"

~~~
eunos
Ironically, this future might be what CCP wished. Their practice won't be
regarded as "archaic" anymore and U.S ultimate grip in tech might start to
wane, however small will be.

A few days ago Pompeo warned that CCP might change "us" (outside PRC in this
context). It seems, however, that U.S. might be the first to be changed.

~~~
mrtksn
I know right? And this saddens me because my whole life the USA was the role
model. I was born in a communist country but it changed to be more like USA at
my early childhood, so USA is the dream. Now the USA is becoming this thing
that values state security in expense of individual freedoms. I am totally not
amused.

edit: unfavourable opinions seem to get downvoted into oblivion. I am actually
surprised by the jubilance in the tech community towards state intervention.
Had no idea that people dreamed of becoming like China where the all knowing
government protects them by telling them what apps can use and which website
they can visit.

~~~
sukilot
The CCP is a threat to individual freedoms. Freedom to consort with an enemy
nation had never been an important individual freedom in any nation.

Don't worry, US has plenty of individual freedom for Enlightening activities
like spewing virus on other people.

~~~
eirini1
sounds like an excuse to me. How is a political organization in a country that
has no jurisdiction over you in any way a threat to your individual freedoms,
but the state apparatus in your own country somehow not even when its
literally telling you which apps you can use and which ones you can't?

------
nardi
The real reason behind this is that TikTok teens ruined his Tulsa rally and
now he wants to get back at them. Simple as that.

~~~
jjcon
So why did India already ban it and why is Australia and Japan in talks to ban
it?

~~~
nardi
I’m not saying there aren’t good reasons to ban it, I’m just saying that’s not
why Trump is doing it.

------
myspamdeli
It’s pretty clear the US gvt doesn’t care about the monopolistic practices by
big tech, the privacy concerns of TikTok, or that CCP has access to user data.
It’s their lack of access to the private user data of this hugely popular app
they lack and are after.

Having MSFT buy it means they’ll have a back door to TikTok content
immediately just like they do Skype. The US 3 letter agencies have been
gunning for this ever since the app blew up, and unlike all the valley apps
they have had no access to its user data.

------
balola
This is a game America can't win, either way the CCP gets to keep the upper
hand, everpresent threat or discrediting entirely.

~~~
rgrs
How?

When China doesnt open up its fire wall for US apps, why should US allow
Chinese?

~~~
balola
When billions of people believe something, it will become a "fact".

Right now the public opinion in China (not mine) is that India and America are
hypocritical bullies and abusing the "national security" excuse, while China
"never banned" any foreign web services, those "simply refused to comply with
Chinese laws regarding terrorism" and their "inaccessibility" totally
justified.

You see, here's the logical trap, Tiktok ostensibly didn't refuse to comply
with any foreign law, and it will do any "dirty work" if being asked to
(unlike foreign companies in China), so by this logic, it's a model citizen
and the ban is unjustified and ridiculous. This plays right into the party's
hands, right into its "century of humiliation" ideology.

>why should US allow Chinese?

So here's the catch, the CCP sabotaged and overthrew the Chinese Nationalist
Party (now Taiwan) government exactly by exploiting its liberal constitution
and free speech, the lesson they learned from that epic success is that never
allow these freedom, China never touted freedom and rights so it doesn't
matter, while the US being the democracy beacon breaching it has everything to
lose.

~~~
ergocoder
> Right now the public opinion in China (not mine) is that India and America
> are hypocritical bullies and abusing the "national security" excuse, while
> China "never banned" any foreign web services, those "simply refused to
> comply with Chinese laws regarding terrorism" and their "inaccessibility"
> totally justified.

This is definitely not a public opinion.

Public opinion in US is splited like it always is in every single matter.

I agree on the ban... or, at least, they should take a closer look regarding
national security.

Sending a lot of citizen personal info to the opposite super power like China
and Russia does seem concerning, don't you agree?

~~~
rfoo
> This is definitely not a public opinion.

OP means this is the public opinion in China, not in US. Or at least that's
the public opinion that CCP wants to install. And unfortunately most of the
people surrounding me agree this. And I can't argue with them without
convincing them the "sometimes misguided censorship" is deliberate and people
should not accept censorship in the first place (if most of them do China
would have already been different). It's literally a trap.

~~~
ergocoder
Ah yes I misread it.

Public opinion in China is going to be almost always anti-US. That's just
regular propaganda for decades.

It's not safe to have differing view in China regarding nationalism.

Not sure why this is news though.

~~~
bllguo
because contrary to what you believe, many Chinese looked up to aspects of the
US.

~~~
ergocoder
I doubt that is true. There may be some percentage that supports US. But
definitely not the majority.

I'd guess it's a very small percentage.

~~~
bllguo
look, things aren't binary.. No, it's not "support", obviously they largely
stand by their country over the US. But it's not North Korea; they understand
that life is good in the US, propaganda aside. They don't think our systems
don't work _in general_, they think it wouldn't work _for them_

to directly answer your question, if you think this is a war of ideology, this
move doesn't do the US any favors, regardless of how necessary or justified it
is

~~~
ergocoder
I'd say banning TikTok has a small downside. Sending citizen info to the
opposing super power should be prevented (it's not binary like you said, but
the risk is high, so the impact is potentially high). The downside is some
Chinese will look at US as hypocritical.

Fine.

Here are 3 geopoltical issues that are way bigger than TikTok banning: Hong
Kong, Taiwan, disputed islands on South China sea with Vietnam and
Philippines. These issues evoke much stronger nationalism.

A large portion of Chineses probably already look at US as very bad guy
regarding these 3 geopolitical issues already. Trying to turn Chinese's
regular person to be positive by not banning TikTok is not worth it.

It's not like "oh yeah, I like US now because they don't ban tiktok, even
though they try to help taiwan, hong kong, and etc. It's fine. TikTok is way
more important here." Probably said no Chinese person ever.

------
rdiddly
Sorry, under what legal framework does the Executive branch of the US
government "ban" an app, and what does that look lik, i.e. what actions does
it take, and has it ever happened before?

~~~
ETHisso2017
IEEPA. No, it hasn't happened to an app before

------
ajarmst
Any fallout from this will be interesting. It can be easily argued that this
is a case of the US President (not the US Government) using arbitrary
emergency powers-—or the threat of their use—-to interfere with a business
deal on behalf of a US company. Even ignoring suits from Facebooks’s
competitors, effect on existing trade deals, and justification for foreign
government interventions against US companies, one wonders if this is the
start of a new trade war with China or just a warning to other social media
companies (“nice market penetration you got there, shame if something were to
happen to it“).

------
dannyr
So how will this work?

Will there be 2 apps? Tiktok US and Tiktok for the rest of the world?

~~~
hatsunearu
Leave it to America to have an app that works just great (Vine), destroy it,
let China copy it, and buy it back.

stonks all the way my brother

~~~
lancesells
From what I know: Jack Dorsey closed down Vine. It wasn't destroyed by any
country. Bytedance bought Musical.ly(Chinese App) and merged it with Tiktok. I
have never used either but I from what I can see is Tiktok is an evolution of
Vine but not a copy. Vine was probably just too early.

------
e-clinton
They’re banning TikTok because they don’t want a Chinese company having direct
access to the location, camera, and microphones of hundreds of millions of
Americans. I have the app installed and have all those permissions disabled.

I understand that it seems unfair but I get where they’re coming from given
that China isn’t exactly a saint when it comes to spying/civil rights.

I think it Microsoft agrees to take ownership of the data and protecting it,
it doesn’t make sense to ban it. I’m surprised Verizon or Twitter hasn’t
stepped up with bid

~~~
gmantg
Most smartphones are made in China, so CCP has access to them at the hardware
level. My bet is that tiktok has hacked the human psychology: it's an
equivalent of addictive sugary drink spiced with coke; it's a problem by
itself, but it's a much bigger problem once we realise who manipulates the us
citizens. I see tiktok as a backdoor into democracy: it can sway opinions of
the masses or it can run social experiments.

~~~
xvector
And somehow it is okay for Facebook and Twitter to wield this power?

~~~
gmantg
That's why CCP banned them in China.

------
jungletime
Whenever I read an implied claim of someone doing something in my interest in
an news article, I assume the opposite of what the claim is.

------
xoxoy
i don’t really get how this works. will the US one have global users or just
US ones?

~~~
sukilot
Global, unless other countries ban an app that US can use to spy on them.

~~~
xoxoy
but is there a non-US version of TikTok then too? i don’t understand how the
two versions interact is what i’m saying.

~~~
chrisrogers
It can be the same exact app on your phone, but be communicating with a
different set of network endpoints.

~~~
xoxoy
no i don’t think that works

i mean the US one would be wholly owned by someone with own dev team servers
etc

the non-US one would have to be a separate app with own team too.

it doesn’t seem to work

------
vlkr
this can be a good way for europe, too. after the last court ruling:
[https://www.cnbc.com/2020/07/16/european-court-rules-on-
face...](https://www.cnbc.com/2020/07/16/european-court-rules-on-facebook-vs-
schrems-case.html) there must be changes. Maybe this means us users can't see
eu users in the social networks and vice versa. But then we could finally post
our nipples on instagram!

------
learc83
To me TikTok feels like ytmnd.com with videos instead of images. I spent hours
there when I was younger.

------
ETHisso2017
I'd like to see any YC users come by and claim the US has a "free market" at
this point.

~~~
smeeth
No-one argues that the US has an unregulated free market and no-one
respectable argues that it should.

Keeping spyware-collected data of private citizens out of the hands of
antagonistic authoritarian regimes seems like an appropriate use of
regulation, no? Hard to argue its less appropriate than trust-busting or
consumer protection regulations.

~~~
wallacoloo
> Keeping spyware-collected data of private citizens out of the hands of
> antagonistic authoritarian regimes seems like an appropriate use of
> regulation, no?

Possibly, yes. And if your goal was actually to fight authoritarianism, you’d
be sure to pass these regulations in some sort of democratic process. You’d
send it through Congress and give the people’s elected representatives a
chance to weigh in. You wouldn’t use an executive order outside of very
extreme, time-sensitive circumstances, if you actually gave a shit about
fighting authoritarianism.

~~~
smeeth
>give the people’s elected representatives a chance to weigh in

Is POTUS not an elected representative? Congress can overrule the president if
they want to, there's nothing stopping them.

Also, who said the goal was "fighting authoritarianism"? I'm pretty sure the
goal is to let americans use TikTok without MSS having all their personal
data.

------
FactCore
From a Chinese multinational to an American multinational. I'm not convinced
that any sort of data safety will arise from this. This is really just US
giving China a taste of its own medicine.

------
crb002
If they get paid in MS stock with a little cash that's probably the best exit
they could hope for. Hopefully MS doesn't kill it off like Skype - which
should have been Zoom.

------
michaelyoshika
if you stare into the abyss, the abyss stares back at you

------
ideals
_social media app that has up to 80 million daily active users in the United
States._

Crazy that one person can ban something over 1/4 the US population uses every
day. The implications of that are staggering.

(for any politically trigger fingered voters who think this opinion is derived
based on current administration, you would be incorrect. I do not think
something like this should ever be decided by a single person, it should go
through congress and if a new law or decision is the result of that, the party
which is to be banned should have the ability to make their case to SCOTUS)

~~~
sukilot
Crazy that one person controls an app that over 1/4 the US population uses.

Crazy that over 1/4 the population uses one entertainment app. I don't even
see how that's possible, even if all tweens/teens/teen-aspirationals use it.

~~~
Mehdi2277
The simple answer is the age penetration in older ages has grown. You can use
these numbers to get a rough estimate,
[https://www.statista.com/statistics/1095186/tiktok-us-
users-...](https://www.statista.com/statistics/1095186/tiktok-us-users-age/)

Disclaimer: I work at US tiktok.

------
xeromal
So is there going to be a US TikTok and a World TikTok?

~~~
sn_master
There has been a China version of so many apps and websites for a very long
time, where China companies have to have full control of the data.

US is doing to China what China been doing to US companies since forever.

In Amazon, Microsoft etc, US engineers of those companies aren't allowed to
access the China servers directly and have to go through the Chinese
operators.

~~~
dilap
Another viewpoint is the US is doing to its citizens what China has been doing
to its citizens since forever.

I don't see that as a good development!

~~~
sn_master
Having US data in US hands doesn't seem like a terrible development to me.

In China, the relationship between tech companies and the government is very
close, and none would question any data requests. Its nothing like Apple which
openly fights the US government in the supreme court..

~~~
dilap
Apple fights to not be forced to unlock phones, which is admirable, but
they'll happily turn over your iCloud data.

To me the greater outrage is that the president can arbitrarily decide which
apps citizens may or may not use. I would like to make that choice for myself,
thank you very much.

~~~
sn_master
Is that an abuse of power? Probably yes. Do I agree with it? Absolutely yes,
because it is for the greater good of the citizens of the country.

Do I like Trump in general? Absolutely not, but I also don't automatically
start cursing any decision he makes just because its made by him without
trying to use two brain cells to analyze it first.

I feel safer knowing US data can be accessed by US government entities than
foreign ones, specially ones that have a documented track record of industrial
espionage against the country. Can't imagine what good can come off the
Chinese government having access to PII and potential backdoor capabilities
(e.g. the clipboard scandal) of tens of millions of children of US
engineers/politicians/workers.

Is there a single reason why that can be good for the US citizens?

The choice of the president wasn't about the "app" itself. It was about the
data being stored in foreign lands. If the app didn't have copious amounts of
data of US citizens, he wouldn't have cared, even if it had a 100% user base
in the US.

Europe has very similar rules on EU data being stored in EU data centers.
Germany is a good example of those policies and no one seems to critisize
them, because no one "blanket-hates" European leaders like they do to Trump.

The decision to ban was because TikTok didn't seem to be willing to cooperate
to fix the data locality problem. Had they promised and started moving their
data centers to the US, I doubt this would have happened. The acquisition by
MS if happens, would do just that and allow the app to continue being used.

~~~
Mehdi2277
They've already done that. Currently there are a couple major data centers
being in US/Singapore. US data is not permitted to go to china. The data
currently is stored in a mix of US/singapore so can't claim solely US. The
relevant blog post is here, [https://newsroom.tiktok.com/en-us/statement-on-
tiktoks-conte...](https://newsroom.tiktok.com/en-us/statement-on-tiktoks-
content-moderation-and-data-security-practices). I'd guess if US requested
data to be solely US, that shift would probably be fine as currently singapore
is mainly used as a backup and it'd be doable to have data centers in more
distinct regions as currently US data is in just virginia.

Also trump already announced he does not intend to permit microsoft acquiring
tiktok to be enough to not ban them. I'm doubtful he'd have any chance winning
a court case if tiktok did sell to microsoft, but sounds like he'll push on
the ban regardless.

Disclaimer: I work at mountain view tiktok.

~~~
dilap
Do you have any insight/theories into _why_ Trump is so opposed to tiktok?

Just as a political calculation it seems curious. (Rile up young voters who
tend to swing against you, eliminate a social network that from what I can see
is relatively conservative-friendly.)

------
woopwoop
Is there any way to know with certainty whether the president has any
financial interest in Microsoft? If there is, does he?

------
lovetocode
TikTok is horrible. Less then a day after signing up I was getting spam text
messages with Chinese writing.

------
cannabis_sam
Another step in the balkanization of the internet, to the cheers of
governments around the world..

------
ezVoodoo
Which law of the USA has been broken by TikTok?

Or it is banned just because it's an app from China?

------
tlow
Will their value plummet if they are banned before an acquisition can take
place?

------
factorialboy
What if China stalls and the US administration changes in a few months.

~~~
aey
Pivot to the pacific was an Obama initiative that was loooong in the making.

It doesn’t matter who drives the train, the tracks are already laid.

~~~
jariel
It matters hugely.

Obama's pivot was based on TTP, and generally avoiding direct confrontation
with China.

Trump's agenda is completely different - ignoring partnership/bilateral
approach, and fairly assertively acting against China.

But those were also strategies founded in different eras: the TTP was create
back when China was still not quite powerful enough to be a dangerous world
actor. Now it's more of a 'standoff' situation with unpredictable leadership
from Trump.

And with only a 4 year horizon after which 'everything changes' on the
American side.

~~~
starfallg
The TTP is in fact direct confrontation, just not overt.

------
unnamedprophet
While this sort of quashing of free markets may be permissible for sovereign
nations, it comes with a heavy cost. Trump, and by proxy the U.S., moves to
force the hand of ByteDance to divest itself of all interest in TikTok at fire
sale prices through threat of shutting them down. The U.S. establishes its
reputation for stifling competition whenever a strong enough sovereign
interest is in play. China, and other countries, will respond in kind to
protect their own interests - Tesla, Apple, Intel and whatever other company
has a juicy stake in China are held hostage until they concede their interests
of to a China state-run company. Imagine trying to do business in another
country when the fear of takeover looms overhead if you ever become too
successful? This behavior only serves to encourage more protectionist and
isolationist markets.

------
_emacsomancer_
Microsoft to buy? Selling the hen house to the fox?

------
ktln2
It is funny to see comments like “this will only strengthen the hostility of
Chinese people against US” - the fact is most if not all Chinese see US as
their arch nemesis.

------
slewis
It’s interesting that folks are generally giving Trump the benefit of the
doubt. There are many comments to the effect of “while there is no public
evidence, maybe the US government has secret evidence that TikTok has broken
the law.”

Trump is incredibly vindictive. Remember a month ago when he hosted a way
under-attended rally, because of a fake registration movement that spread on,
yup, TikTok? Trump remembers.

------
la6471
This thread is hijacked by members of Chinese communist party - they are
flagging all anti Chinese messages in this thread. Beware!!! My message got
flagged just for saying that the CCP should discover the vaccine for Covid 19
and give democratic rights to people of China and someone flagged my message.

------
djim
what about not collecting user data? isnt that better than msft collecting it?

------
jrsdav
I wonder how long this deal has actually been in the works, and Trump,
seemingly privy to this knowledge, saw a good opportunity to take credit by
pre-empting the inevitable announcement of a sell off. Why else would he
announce his plans of an executive order instead of just doing it?

~~~
scotu
you might be right, but there are other reason to announce instead of doing:
getting leverage, getting attention, being someone that talks a lot and does
much less, not having a brain/mouth filter... probably a mix of trying to get
leverage for something probably unrelated and getting some attention (possibly
diverting it from something else)

------
vonwoodson
Ok, but for real: TikTok is a propaganda machine for China. End of story.

~~~
xvector
Have you ever used the app, and do you have any evidence of that statement?

------
cmurf
>We are not an M&A (mergers and acquisitions) country,” Trump said.

What? Can anyone parse this?

------
namelosw
From the US-China conflict perspective, it seems the Trump administration is
looking for something that China cannot easily retaliate.

China can easily pick a consulate to close when the US closes consulate in
Houston. But businesses from the US in China always require Chinese companies
to operate, just like World of Warcraft is operated by NetEase in China.

After Microsoft acquire Tiktok's operation, if China just picks some US
business to do the same it would make China looks too soft because China is
already doing this for decades, and Trump could claim the US has beaten China
in this round. But if China escalates the conflict by retaliating in radical
ways, the Trump administration could rally more before the election.

~~~
baybal2
Very much that. Beijing is running out of big "American" companies it can
retaliate against.

No Facebook in China, no Tviter in China, all major American brands are
effectively franchises, or joint ventures, so they will be shooting their own
business in the foot.

They can of course order those Chinese joint venture owners to appropriate the
American stake in their corporate entities, but those state never been high to
begin with, with Chinese JV sides always trying to exfiltrate equity out of
them.

Out of big fish, pretty much the only one remaining is Apple, which owns very
little in China, but will be crippled if being denied access to Chinese
contract manufacturers.

~~~
manquer
It will cripple China even more than Apple .

Apple will have 1-2 really bad years and would eventually be able to move
their supply chain to other countries . Apple has the money to whether that
storm

The millions of jobs lost in China would be permanent, and start a trend and
they loose their manufacturing edge .

~~~
spideymans
To add to your point: Apple has been pretty rapidly shifting operations to
India, precisely for this reason. I’d be willing to bet Apple has plans in
place to move the rest of their manufacturing operations if China were to
retaliate against it. Not saying it would be easy, or painless, but perhaps
not as difficult as we’d imagine.

------
mark_l_watson
Maybe I am blaming the wrong companies/countries but it seems to me that
platforms like iOS and Android should provide near perfect sand boxing for all
apps, including TikTok. No app should be able to quietly have access to our
devices.

The new beta for iOS is doing a better job by having little notifications of
what app is using the camera, microphone, your contacts, etc.

I would also like to speculate on something: Peter Theil owns a lot of
Facebook stock and TikTok is a market threat to Facebook. Peter Theil is close
with President Trump. You can see where I am going with this...

------
bitxbitxbitcoin
That's one way to avoid a US ban.

~~~
ecf
This is what a lot companies who do business in China have to go through.

For example, Activision-Blizzard are pretty much fully separated from The9,
which is the only authorized distributor for World of Warcraft in China.

Edit: Apologies, the source I was looking at was outdated and NetEase is the
current distributor for WoW in China.

~~~
puranjay
But unlike China, America fashions itself as a bastion of capitalism.
Borrowing Chinese practices seems a little antithetical to everything I see
America as

~~~
fermienrico
America has been acting neutral for last decades, especially last 15 years
where China has asymmetrically taken advantage of American companies. China is
getting a taste of their own medicine and I am fine with that.

~~~
puranjay
This is essentially admitting that the free market lost and doesn't work
anymore. Because the free market has clearly decided that it likes TikTok,
even enough to share its data with the company.

I don't think people realize how significant this might be.

~~~
jen20
> even enough to share its data with the company.

How many people do you think have opted into this with informed consent vs
clicking through multiple pages of deliberately obfuscated terms?

~~~
eirini1
how is this in any way in opposition to the free market? The information is
freely acceesible, the fact that its hard to understand is the problem of the
consumer no? The free market solution would be to have some kind of
independent organization summarize this information and attempt to distribute
it in the hopes people read.

------
Waterluvian
At what point do the big tech companies see the real threat of Trump and begin
actively campaigning against him?

Feels like they have immense power if they decided to act politically.

~~~
throwlogon
I don't know why this is getting downvoted; companies in other sectors (e.g.
oil) get involved in US politics regularly.

But there's little precedent for media companies to take action in US politics
overtly. (IANAL, but I suspect there are legal impediments as well). Taking a
political stand, or providing support for one side, might force big tech
companies to resolve the ambiguity as to whether they're media companies or
not.

EDIT: Actually maybe there is nothing stopping tech companies from choosing a
side; apparently media companies _do_ make political contribitions:
[https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2010/08/news-corps-
million-...](https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2010/08/news-corps-million-
dollar-donation/)

EDIT 2: I can see I've accidentally opened a can of worms about biased
coverage and editorials; but my usage of "support" was intended as overt and
consistent involvement in political campaigning, generally through donations.
And to my surprise, that does occur.

~~~
MiroF
> But there's little precedent for media companies to take action in US
> politics overtly

Sorry, but are we in the same country?

------
Ijumfs
So will they be keeping all the intrusive spyware features as a part of this
deal?

------
praveen9920
Trump's grudge on Tiktok users apart, could this be a plot of hostile take
over?

With all the public threats ByteDance is receiving from president of USA, Msft
or any other company which acquires, gets one of the biggest social networking
site of the decade at give away price.

~~~
bitxbit
I don’t think it’s at a discount at all. They’re effectively selling it at the
height of the market. Even if they cut valuation in half, it’d still be at a
significant premium.

~~~
DabbyDabberson
I feel like sentiment was similar for when FB bought IG for $1B. Today, we
would all agree that was vastly under priced.

~~~
DuskStar
Well, sure. But similarly, most people today would agree that Tumblr was not
worth nearly 1.1 billion when Yahoo bought it.

Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose.

------
inson
Why there's a so much hype about blocking TikTok? China blocked multiple US
websites by replicating them first and blocking them (Google, FB, Twitter),
irony, isn't it? Were those websites against Chinese laws? I'm surprised by
some people reacting negatively to this. P.S. I am not a pro Trump.

------
CyanLite4
Trump seems intent on this because of the Tulsa Rally fiasco. But at what
point does it backfire on him? Tens of millions of pissed off 18yr olds could
easily sway the election.

Meanwhile, Microsoft has quietly avoided the anti-trust spotlight recently yet
has acquired github, LinkedIn, and now a social network that could rival
Facebook. Satya Nadella is a genius.

~~~
kyawzazaw
18yr old are hopefully not pissed off primarily stemming from the ban of this
one app.

Regardless, young population have historically been absent from voting.

------
pinkfoot
So soon all the tech savvy kids will learn that their favourite apps are only
available on the Hauwei app store?

~~~
throwaway1777
it won't really be their favorite app if no one else is using it

------
liuliu
Just echo back on U.S. doesn't have precedents of blocking software in the
article. I don't think that's true. U.S. has both means (file request to Apple
and Google to pull software off the shelf, remove the domain from root DNS
etc) and done these before for piracy and other reasons.

~~~
eli
What does “file a request” mean here? Send a letter asking?

~~~
liuliu
DMCA is for one. I am not sure for "national security" reasons what options
would be. It is definitely challenging to come up with excuses within rules of
law. I would imagine that some combinations of failures to meet FCC regulation
and "immediate" national security threat probably would do the trick. There is
no guarantee that Apple AppStore or Google Play Store won't make a stand and
challenge these requests in court though.

------
andrewPP
Us companies like Facebook and Twitter had a chance to operate in China as
long as they were willing to follow local laws/policies; they were banned
because they didn’t want to cooperate. On the other hand, TikTok seems willing
to obey us laws and is bringing its team/data center into the us. Banning
TikTok in spite of that sounds similar to injecting disinfectant for COVID

~~~
sergiotapia
China is a communist regime. They can do whatever the hell they want, why
would american companies spend any time conforming to their demands when they
can pull the rug out from under them at any time. Also, they would be under
their total control forever.

~~~
sukilot
American companies do it for money. Companies like major movie studios, sports
leagues, operating system vendors, search engine providers

------
samstave
[https://www.reddit.com/r/videos/comments/fxgi06/not_new_news...](https://www.reddit.com/r/videos/comments/fxgi06/not_new_news_but_tbh_if_you_have_tiktiok_just_get/?sort=top)

~~~
sergiotapia
"removed by mods" \- exactly why I deleted my reddit account. They were
conditioning children and young people to be okay with censorship.

~~~
dimator
The thread seems available to me. The YouTube link is broken, which is on
YouTube's side.

------
cwhiz
I’m fine with anything that damages China. The entire western world should be
grouping together to fight the Chinese state. Their behavior the last couple
of decades is obscene.

Right now, in 2020, China is operating Muslim concentration camps. Their
factories are “employed” by de facto slave labor.

The western world should universally shun China. Ban anything that originates
from China or anything that contains parts or software that originates from
China.

~~~
markus_zhang
In fact, the computer you use to make posts on ycombinator could contain some
components from China as well.

~~~
cwhiz
I understand that. It would be a short term painful switch as we completely
pulled the western world out of China.

