
Commerce Department Prohibits WeChat and TikTok Transactions - JacobHenner
https://www.commerce.gov/news/press-releases/2020/09/commerce-department-prohibits-wechat-and-tiktok-transactions-protect
======
kodablah
This is disappointing yet expected from the executive.

What's more disappointing is watching the thunderous applause from
technologists here and elsewhere as software is outlawed which is not
otherwise illegal and is not being litigated as illegal. We should not cheer
on the restriction of any software on nationalistic terms. Content is one
thing, physical equipment another, but algorithms should be borderless. Most
in the community disagree with encryption export restrictions, why can't they
similarly disagree with software import restrictions? 2A groups recognize
slippery slope precedents, why can't technologists?

If the content/data is being harvested and/or managed illegally, then make
that illegal and/or prosecute under that pretense (even if the evidence is
subject to national security non-disclosure). Otherwise, it's obvious this is
political posturing at the cost of digital freedom. It should be as widely
condemned as government surveillance has been.

(reposted from the now-buried
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24515461](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24515461))

~~~
ghoomketu
Yet every time this is posted the default response is that China has done
worse to US companies, so It's only fair! How do you reply to that? (not
asking rhetorically)

~~~
dirtyid
US media companies are free to operate in China, provided they follow Chinese
media laws that applies to other domestic platforms.

TikTok operates in US under US laws, that's technically fair and reciprocal.
If people mean reciprocal in spirit, like joint venture, then TikTok
partnering with Oracle and storing data in US server is reciprocal in spirit.
You can apply this reciprocal state of exception for all Chinese companies in
US, provided JV partners reciprocate in perks (i.e. in China JVs provide
massive land and other subsidies). You can even legislate tech transfers for
TikTok's algorithm. And for the purpose of trade and commercial entities
operating to make a profit that's sufficient.

But I surmise the crux of these bad-faith reciprocal arguments is that US
should be able to impose its values on foreign markets, and US companies
should be able operate in those markets to spread US values like how Chinese
platforms operating under US values can shape US opinions. That's valid, but
an that's a conversation well past trade fairness which TikTok has already
met.

But this isn't about trade fairness, this & Clean Network is about Chinese
containment and US hegemony. And that's also valid. China's going to do what
they do, the question people here needs to ask is should America also do what
China does.

~~~
perennate
I think the US passing legislation that requires foreign companies to transfer
their technology (or worse, copying brutally repressive CCP laws on media)
would be far far far more damaging than surgically banning companies from
specific countries under a reciprocal reaction.

~~~
dirtyid
Media laws would be progressive data protections, just evenly applied. But we
know why that's not on the table. Tech transfer + JV only for countries that
require it, i.e. reciprocal. Same with property, company, asset ownership
which that bothers a lot of people. The point is there are reciprocal options
for reciprocal advocates. But reading a lot of these reciprocal arguments,
they look like a dogwhistle for containment, which is fine. Policy making
circles discuss containment openly. Just be upfront about it and stop
pretending it's about fairness. And try not to let reeeee China undermine
longterm self-interests. Which this act seems to do.

------
shadowgovt
A telling quote comes to us from the Commerce Secretary, via reporting by the
New York Times:

"""What they collect are data on locality, data on what you are streaming
toward, what your preferences are, what you are referencing, every bit of
behavior that the American side is indulging in becomes available to whoever
is watching on the other side."""

Well, shit. If that's the concern, I hope nobody's told them about blogs,
YouTube, or the Internet.

~~~
sudosysgen
Of course, that's not the concern, the concern is that they don't get that
data, somebody else does. It's pure hypocrisy. They could have done the right
thing by passing sweeping privacy laws that every company would be subjected
to, but in reality the goal is to maintain the monopoly of the USG on
espionage.

~~~
bosswipe
I think the real concern is that social networks can be used for mass
political opinion manipulation. Algorithmic recommendations and deplatforming
have become political battlegrounds and the power of the social media
companies is recognized more and more as being immense.

~~~
pjc50
> I think the real concern is that social networks can be used for mass
> political opinion manipulation

Again, the concern is not that that is happening, but that it's happening by
people not under control of the US elite. The hyper-partisan news
organisations of the US engage in "opinion manipulation" just fine, as does
Facebook.

~~~
bosswipe
Correct. The difference between Facebook and Tiktok is who can apply pressure
and in what ways. For example many people believe that Trump's antitrust moves
against Google are also political, different situation different techniques
but same goal, a battle over the control of social networks.

------
cwhiz
Can Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, Telegram, Signal, Google Chat, Slack,
Discord, and others operate freely in China?

If the answer to that question is no, then we should treat Chinese apps the
exact same way that China treats American apps. Otherwise we're just getting
hilariously abused.

Edit: It's called reciprocity. The US can operate a free market and trade with
other countries that also operate free markets. We cannot, and should not,
allow the US free market to be abused by foreign governments. If China does
not want American companies to operate in China the US should reciprocate.
Otherwise we're just being taken advantage of. It's not a violation of
American free market principles. Just look at the whole fiasco with AirBus
subsidies. The US should only engage with foreign governments that respect
free trade.

~~~
jhedwards
Why should we emulate the policies of another country if we agree that those
policies are wrong and/or harmful? That seems like the exact opposite of what
we should do: lead by example by showing how a society without such
restriction is better off.

~~~
pentae
Yes because 'leading by example' worked so well for Democracy in China and
Hong Kong

~~~
Aperocky
See, this is part of the problem, constantly trying to change what things are
outside of our borders.

Bringing Freedom to Iraq, and Democracy to Afghanistan, etc.

The first question to be asked should be 'How is this affecting Americans and
their rights' and not how 'this didn't seem to work in China.' Especially
seeing the ban applies only to the US.

------
shadowgovt
"""While the threats posed by WeChat and TikTok are not identical, they are
similar. Each collects vast swaths of data from users, including network
activity, location data, and browsing and search histories. Each is an active
participant in China’s civil-military fusion and is subject to mandatory
cooperation with the intelligence services of the CCP."""

It's funny that they're saying that like Room 641A isn't public knowledge.

Of course, when it's the NSA cloning data out of AT&T to spy for Uncle Sam,
it's the _good_ spying. ;)

~~~
drchopchop
In the spectrum of "evil", I'd rather an NSA run by American citizens to have
my data than the Chinese government. I can, in theory, at least elect
representatives to change the policies of the NSA. I have no such power over
China, and China is actively censoring and repressing citizens who even mildly
criticize the state.

How are those the same?

~~~
Miner49er
I'm the opposite. I'd rather China have my data then the NSA.

China has less incentive to go after me, and what are they gonna do to me?
It's not like the United States will extradite their own citizens to China or
anything like that.

The United States could easily use my data to come after me at some point, if
they decide to. They could make my political viewpoints illegal (like the
McCarthy Era) and find evidence of my views from my data and throw me in jail
or worse.

~~~
CincinnatiMan
Look at it from a different angle of giving data to China gives them more
power and reduces the power of the US. It may not matter a ton in your
lifetime, but maybe your kids will see China as the world superpower, imposing
its value system onto the world. I'd prefer the US remain the top dog because
while not perfect, I like the value system of the US more than I do China.

~~~
ixtli
Eh. There’s a long list of moral bankruptcy even before trump. We operate
literal concentration camps for children here and I don’t see these breathless
articles in the international press about that.

~~~
reaperducer
_We operate literal concentration camps for children here_

Holocaust survivors would find your hyperbole disgusting.

~~~
shadowgovt
Some actual holocaust survivors do. ([https://www.foxnews.com/politics/aoc-
holocaust-survivors-res...](https://www.foxnews.com/politics/aoc-holocaust-
survivors-respond-to-aocs-concentration-camp-comments))

Some actual holocaust survivors do not, and consider it similar to their lived
experience, not hyperbole.
([https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commentary/2018/06/19/a-d...](https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commentary/2018/06/19/a-dallas-
holocaust-survivor-sees-his-reflection-in-the-faces-of-children-separated-
from-their-parents/), [https://www.thedailybeast.com/holocaust-survivor-yes-
the-bor...](https://www.thedailybeast.com/holocaust-survivor-yes-the-border-
detention-centers-are-like-concentration-camps))

This is a point of record; no need to hypothesize.

~~~
ixtli
Wait you’re saying Jews aren’t a monolith?

------
danimal88
I have conflicted feelings about this but I do think that the 'spin' is poor.
China doesn't allow Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc. behind the great firewall.
Why not just say we are blocking their pseudo-government social apps to be at
economic/market access parity. It seems accurate and fair. Spinning it as
national security, while potentially true (really don't know), seems like an
unnecessary narrative.

~~~
snazz
Stooping to China's level by blocking foreign software seems like an admission
that the US cannot produce a viable competitor with its much more free market,
does it not? If the other side plays dirty, playing dirty ourselves in
response seems like a very poor precedent. Restricting the freedom of American
citizens to choose a social media app feels like the antithesis of the
American free-market ideology, in my opinion.

I'm willing to entertain other ideas, of course, and I'd love to hear any
flaws in my logic.

~~~
cwhiz
The US can, does, and should act reciprocally. In all markets where there are
no restrictions in trade or commerce we treat foreign competitors fairly, as
we should. In markets where US companies are not treated fairly, we should
reciprocate.

In the case of China, American companies are not treated fairly. We should
reciprocate. Otherwise it's a lopsided engagement that will eventually result
in Chinese corporate dominance. We can't operate in China, but they can
operate in the US? No way.

~~~
dmurdoch
100% this. It's insane to me that some people don't understand this when I
discuss it with them.

Potential market share for chinese company: <population of world>

Potential market share for literally any other company: <population of world -
population of china>.

Since <population of china> is ~1.4 Billion, and <population of world> is ~7.8
Billion, how does one not understand that a chinese company has an insane and
unfair advantage.

~~~
DiogenesKynikos
> Potential market share for literally any other company: <population of world
> - population of china>.

China is one of the largest markets for a very large number of Western
companies. If you ever go to China, chances are that the taxi that picks you
up will be a Volkswagen, and the planes that take you from one city to the
next will be made by Boeing or Airbus. You'll see Starbucks, McDonald's and
KFC everywhere, and it's likely you'll stay in a Marriott or Hilton. If you go
to the mall, you'll see foreign clothing brands everywhere, and the
electronics shops will be filled with devices powered by Intel, Micron,
Qualcomm, AMD, Nvidia, etc.

> It's insane to me that some people don't understand this when I discuss it
> with them.

What I don't get is how people believe that foreign companies don't operate in
China. Have these people ever been to China?

~~~
snazz
Apple and Microsoft also operate in China.

------
jocro
Salient points here:

\---

As of September 20, 2020, the following transactions are prohibited:

1\. Any provision of service to distribute or maintain the WeChat or TikTok
mobile applications, constituent code, or application updates through an
online mobile application store in the U.S.;

2\. Any provision of services through the WeChat mobile application for the
purpose of transferring funds or processing payments within the U.S.

As of September 20, 2020, for WeChat and as of November 12, 2020, for TikTok,
the following transactions are prohibited:

1\. Any provision of internet hosting services enabling the functioning or
optimization of the mobile application in the U.S.;

2\. Any provision of content delivery network services enabling the
functioning or optimization of the mobile application in the U.S.;

3\. Any provision directly contracted or arranged internet transit or peering
services enabling the function or optimization of the mobile application
within the U.S.;

4.Any utilization of the mobile application’s constituent code, functions, or
services in the functioning of software or services developed and/or
accessible within the U.S.

\---

That last piece especially is quite concerning, and seems like a clear
overreach of federal authority, no? Don't know that I've ever seen execution
of software alone as an enforceable offense, and as written it seems to outlaw
even opening up the app if you previously have it downloaded.

~~~
sandworm101
>> 2\. Any provision of content delivery network services enabling the
functioning or optimization of the mobile application in the U.S.;

That's the big one. That would suggest blocking by ISPs, something that is
technically not easy and legally troubling. Do ISPs now have to block the
activities of Chinese phones traveling to the US? That will take effort.

~~~
trillic
They’ll just use edge locations in Canada

~~~
sandworm101
Canada and the US are pretty integrated. Do US ISPs need to block WeChat
traffic that is transiting the US, say coming from China to a user standing in
Canada or the UK? That sort of blocking could have serious impacts beyond
wechat/tiktok.

------
crazygringo
From the related NYT article [1]:

> _The prohibitions raise the question of whether Google and Apple, the major
> operators of American app stores, could sue the administration._

> _Tech companies have made clear that they don’t like the idea of blocking
> apps without a more organized policy process, and have suggested that they
> see this as a First Amendment issue, said Adam Segal, a cybersecurity expert
> at the Council on Foreign Relations._

> _Mr. Segal said it was not entirely clear why the administration had chosen
> to go after these two Chinese services, and not other similar ones. “A lot
> of it just feels to me to be improvisational,” he said._

[1] [https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/18/business/trump-tik-tok-
we...](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/18/business/trump-tik-tok-wechat-
ban.html)

~~~
eggsnbacon1
> Tech companies have made clear that they don’t like the idea of blocking
> apps without a more organized policy process, and have suggested that they
> see this as a First Amendment issue, said Adam Segal, a cybersecurity expert
> at the Council on Foreign Relations.

Yet they're both perfectly fine with blocking apps for arbitrary reasons
citing "app store policy".

Lets be blunt here, whether you agree with the Tiktok issue or not, for Apple
and Google this is purely a money issue. They are probably afraid this will
increase support for third party app stores among the masses

~~~
pc86
> _Yet they 're both perfectly fine with blocking apps for arbitrary reasons
> citing "app store policy"._

Phrased less disingenuously: Private companies are fine making decisions based
on their own internal policies, as opposed to blocking certain apps based on
nebulous requests/pseudo-demands from the government.

~~~
JackFr
That doesn't quite capture it. I want to buy an app for my phone and a vendor
wants to sell it to me. But because my phone is a walled garden, Apple and
Google who are third parties to the transaction can step in and prevent it.

The Department of Commerce is saying that the Uniform Commercial Code is also
a bit of a walled garden, and we can step in and prevent it.

~~~
pc86
There are many, many things that are totally legal for private companies to do
but the government is implicitly or explicitly prohibited from doing. Freedom
of speech (not saying this is an example of that) is probably the prime
example.

A company can bar you from saying just about anything. You can be fired for
wearing a tie your boss doesn't like (this never happens, but it's legal in 49
states). The government has very narrow parameters in which is can limit
speech, or more accurately, punish you for given speech.

------
sudosysgen
It's not just a ban on import, but also a ban on execution! It's insane
overreach.

The government should have the power to manage armies, fiscal policies, and so
on, but giving the State the power to decide which algorithms I should be
allowed to run on my own computer is insane.

~~~
dragonelite
Its not even that, Pompeo already talked about a quasi US version of the great
firewall called the Clean network. Its kinda weird seeing the US being afraid
of competition. Kinda had hoped that the scenario Kai Fu Lee wrote about in
his book "AI superpowers" wouldn't happen that the tech world would bifurcate
into the East vs the West.

~~~
ericmay
Eh I don’t think the US is afraid of competition, but what competition
exactly? Chinese companies can freely operate in the US, but American
companies can’t freely operate in China? Obviously that isn’t going to go on
forever. None of this would be happening if Facebook, Twitter, Google, etc.
we’re allowed to operate in China like TikTok is/was allowed to operate in the
US.

~~~
DarthGhandi
> American companies can’t freely operate in China

McDonald's, Nike, Boeing, Microsoft, P&G, General Electric (to name just a
few) all hold dominant market share in China. I have no idea why people
constantly repeat this claim so easily debunked. US companies are everywhere
in the country and making billions.

~~~
ericmay
Because we're clearly talking about tech companies and social media companies.

~~~
DiogenesKynikos
The US trade relationship with China is much larger than social media
companies (Apple, Micron, Qualcomm and plenty of other tech companies have no
problem in China - what we're talking about here are _media_ companiesm not
tech companies in general). By focusing only on media companies, people in
this conversation are getting a very narrow and distorted view of the US-China
trade relationship. The US does very well, business-wise, in China, contrary
to what most Americans seem to believe.

~~~
ericmay
Sure, how do you define does very well in China?

~~~
DiogenesKynikos
Many US companies have made huge returns on investment in China, and China is
a major market for many American companies.

This is a tech forum, so we can go down a list of US tech companies, giving
their 2017 revenue from China:

* Apple: $45 billion (20% of Apple's total)

* Intel: $15 billion (its largest market, 24% of total)

* Qualcomm: $15 billion (>60% of Qualcomm's total)

* Micron: $10 billion (>50% of Micron's total)

* Broadcom: $9 billion (>50 of Broadcom's total)

* Cisco: $8 billion (15% of Cisco's total)

The list goes on and on, but you get the picture.

The numbers come from here: [https://www.marketwatch.com/story/trade-war-
watch-these-are-...](https://www.marketwatch.com/story/trade-war-watch-these-
are-the-us-companies-with-the-most-at-stake-in-china-2018-03-29)

------
throwaway0a5e
To all the people pontificating about who they'd rather have spy on them:

This isn't about spying. This is about money and trade relations with china.
The fact that the business in question has a side effect of spying is nice but
it's not the primary motivator. TikTok is the first Chinese tech platform to
strike it rich in the US and the administration sees itself as trying to give
them a dose of their own medicine.

~~~
koheripbal
Bingo. ...and this point is made clear by the US demand that China fork over
the TikTok source code - something China routinely demands of foreign
companies.

------
matthewmcg
The basis for this order is a statute that targets financial transactions, 50
USC 1702[1]. But the order claims to bar "provision of hosting services" and
even "peering" after 9/20\. This seems to plainly contradict Section 1702(b)
of the statute which says the president has no authority to restrict "personal
communication...which does not involve a transfer of anything of value" or
importing or exporting "whether commercial or otherwise, regardless of format
or medium of transmission...any information or informational materials[.]"

Expect a quick legal challenge.

If I were a government lawyer working on this, I would like to think that I
would honor my oath of office and tell the President "sir, you don't have the
authority to do this" rather than "yes sir, let me scour the US code for
something that can be stretched to fit this," but this administration seems to
be systematically purging anyone that doesn't follow the party line.

[1]:
[https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/1702](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/1702)

------
excalibur
> The President has provided until November 12 for the national security
> concerns posed by TikTok to be resolved. If they are, the prohibitions in
> this order may be lifted.

Not seeing this bit being discussed elsewhere. The whole Oracle deal may not
be dead after all.

~~~
Mindless2112
Anything less than a sale will not assuage concerns, and the Chinese
government has prevented TikTok from being sold. So no, it's dead.

------
foota
I'm really confused about why the adminstration is doing this right before the
election, seems like annoying a bunch of young people is a great way to get
out the democratic vote.

~~~
Ccecil
This is why. [https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/21/politics/tiktok-trump-
tulsa-r...](https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/21/politics/tiktok-trump-tulsa-
rally/index.html)

No other reason. It ties in neatly with the revenge track record and the
timing of events ties in also.

(Just the facts, I have no political view towards either side)

~~~
kanox
> This is why

Nonsense, there is no proof that this is related.

~~~
Ccecil
In situations where definitive proof of any clear reason does not exist we are
left with the facts presented to us and probabilities.

Again...this has nothing to do with politics. I am merely looking at things
from the view of an outside observer.

There are many more valid reasons to limit Chinese influence and "data
gathering" but they are largely (at this point) being ignored. This does not
begin to dip into the actual "political" reasons both countries involved have
going on.

------
sidibe
If this stick, it could be very bad for Apple. This is something that can make
lots of people switch off of iPhones. Millions of Chinese abroad probably want
to have sideloading WeChat as an option

~~~
balola
It's easier to work around than you think, it didn't stop Chinese from
installing banned VPN tools on iPhones afterall, all you need is shared or
registered foreign Apple IDs.

------
supernova87a
I remember when I was laughing at countries like Kyrgyzstan or Kenya or
wherever, which "shut down the internet" for students taking exams or because
the president for life decided it was a danger to public order. The
arbitrariness and 3rd world country-ness of it all.

Now I'm not laughing so much.

~~~
xster
India might be a closer example to the western audience on HN

"How India became the world’s leader in internet shutdowns"

[https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/08/19/1006359/india-
in...](https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/08/19/1006359/india-internet-
shutdowns-blackouts-pandemic-kashmir/)

~~~
aszen
By the way the shutdown on high speed mobile internet is still ongoing in one
territory, it's now been over a year

------
jordache
ha people in the US have to VPN now, to bypass the Great Trump Wall of U.S.?

~~~
bamboozled
My thoughts exactly, the rest of the world will continue posting funny videos
while Americans come up with creative ways to get around this.

------
perennate
When the US imposes tariffs on other countries, like Canada, we expect Canada
to reciprocate.

Reciprocal countermeasures are crucial for discouraging the original activity,
whether it be tariffs or bans on foreign internet service companies.

Thus, in response to the CCP's effective ban on foreign companies, we should
absolutely expect India, the US, and other countries to reciprocate.

Failing to reciprocate would only serve to encourage actors to engage more in
the activity (whether it be tariffs or bans on internet services), and in this
case lead to a more greatly fragmented internet.

Just as reciprocal tariffs protect the free flow of trade by discouraging
further tariffs, here, the US reciprocating CCP bans protects the free flow of
information on the internet.

------
curiousllama
From a policy perspective, the states HAS to say this.

Wisdom of the particular policy aside, once a country makes a really bold
demand - "do X or we'll do Y" \- they can't back down without losing a
tremendous amount of credibility. If you don't follow through on your threats,
they're meaningless; if your threats aren't meaningful, only action is. Action
is more expensive, so it costs you more to accomplish a goal, so you can
accomplish less.

I happen to think this particular policy is unwise (dude, you need allies, and
you think Europe won't help you regulate tech? C'mon), but the US has
committed. Barring judicial intervention, it would be more unwise to back down
now.

~~~
hawthornio
Well I guess it’s a good thing we didn’t back down on building a wall and
making Mexico pay for it by that logic. /s

I don’t think this reasoning makes sense. Wouldn’t it be better for the US to
back down, showing that we are judicial and fair country that doesn’t lash out
in petty ways? Trump makes insane claims all the time; no one would take any
notice if he didn’t follow through on this one either.

------
sneak
Once again, we see "national security", which used to mean "public safety",
being switched out to mean "state security": security of the government
itself.

They'd like there to be a monopoly on bulk surveillance of US persons: only
companies friendly (or who can be forced to be friendly) to the US military
are allowed to do it.

Censoring people to further state security is abhorrent, and is yet another
reason why businesses will increasingly choose to domicile outside of the US
market. It's ridiculous that they can impose these sorts of heavyhanded
restrictions on US companies.

------
sneak
Once again we confront the terrible consequences of large corporate powers
(e.g. App Store signing) being able to, in an instant upon legal demand or
other state threat, function as a government censorship department.

[https://sneak.berlin/20200421/normalcy-
bias/](https://sneak.berlin/20200421/normalcy-bias/)

This is a huge ticking time bomb: insofar as the government can order large,
centralized corporations to block, censor, alter, or otherwise impede your
person-to-person communications, it's only a matter of time before it's a
direct issue for health and safety, whether it be disaster, unrest, or war.

Sure, it might be illegal, or might get unwound in court in the weeks or
months or years to follow. But in the meantime, you're cut off from friends,
family, and information, and your family might not survive the disaster or
crisis that triggered the government demand long enough to have the wrong
turned right in court, much later.

This is an existential threat to a free society. The state must not be able to
pick up the phone and have your communications tools shut off in bulk.

What happens when there's a wildfire or a natural disaster or a war and the
military demands that Facebook disable Messenger and WhatsApp and that Apple
disable iMessage in a certain region, on national security grounds?

We built a network designed to survive a nuclear war, and then somehow
recentralized all of the node-to-node communications edges in an overlay
network, squandering that whole benefit.

------
ineedasername
I'd much rather have strict privacy laws enforced with fines & bans than this
type of ban by fiat.

It would also be much less of a geo-political issue if it had the weight of
law instead of just policy behind it: Pointing to a specific violation of law
is much easier to justify than a vague sense that something with the app &
data collection is not right. (and statutes can be much more consistently
applied than vaguely justified ad-hoc policies)

------
helen___keller
Putting aside the politics of it all, crappy day to be a part of the Chinese
American community with friends and family overseas.

~~~
chrisjc
Can't you still communicate with Whatsapp, Telegram or the myriad of other
communication platforms?

~~~
idrios
Whatsapp is banned in China. I'm guessing Telegram is too. Facebook, Google
hangouts, Twitter, Snapchat, Instagram all are too, blocked at the ISP level.

If you want to talk to someone in Mainland China, your option is pretty much
only WeChat

~~~
chrisjc
Perhaps those apps can be unbanned in China to prevent all the inconvenience
created by the WeChat ban in the US. I understand all those apps don't have
the same set of features (payment, news, etc) but should suffice for basic
communication needs, and I'm sure that's what is most important to friends and
family abroad.

~~~
idrios
Well obviously that will never happen. It just sucks for those of us with
friends in China where all we want to do is keep in contact. I blame China
more than the US but this whole fight for control over communication platforms
is so annoying and leaves most of us helpless.

~~~
chrisjc
That seems very unfortunate... I can't imagine what it must feel like to be
technically cutoff from friends and family in the digital age.

------
dvduval
Banning WeChat especially affects how average Chinese citizens view the US,
and the overall effect is worse relations with China. In terms of bad actors,
this will just create more of a black market, causing people who must do
business with China to use apps and methods that they are less familiar with,
enabling scammers.

~~~
balola
WeChat isn't at all successful in the US, and it's known for its censorship
even inside China, average Chinese are more concerned about iPhones and WeChat
inside China.

Tiktok on the other hand is a completely seperate product designed to obey
foreign laws (not necessarily values), considered a spineless panderer back
home, its disgraceful fall is what can be called a rude awakening.

~~~
lgats
In Chinese-American communities, WeChat is integral
[https://www.yelp.com/search?find_desc=accepts+wechat](https://www.yelp.com/search?find_desc=accepts+wechat)

~~~
balola
Foreign Chinese, usually rich and connected, are more often than not
considered "traitors" by the masses, increasingly viewed with disdain, they
are not even welcomed to visit China.

>Trapped Abroad, China’s ‘Little Pinks’ Rethink Their Country >Young and
patriotic, overseas students often defend their nation against its critics.
But when many tried to return home during the pandemic, they became targets
themselves. [https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/24/business/china-
nationalis...](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/24/business/china-nationalist-
students-coronavirus.html)

------
Sodaware
And iPhones with TikTok pre-installed are already going up on eBay.

~~~
jordache
it's dumb. after nov 12, tiktok traffic will be ended as well

~~~
sudosysgen
And then you'll just have to use a VPN, a proxy, or an alternate DNS depending
on how it's made. Big deal.

~~~
NovemberWhiskey
How big an overlap do you think the TikTok market and the "willing and able to
set up and pay for a VPN on their phone" market is?

~~~
sudosysgen
Actually, quite big. And a VPN likely wouldn't be needed at all, it's a worst
case scenario.

In any case, if people are willing to pay for an iPhone with TikTok pre-
installed, they're willing to pay 2$ a month (or less) for a VPN.

------
langitbiru
I wonder whether it is possible to build TikTok as a web application so US
citizens can use TikTok web application instead of TikTok mobile application?
You know, Netflix has a web app and a mobile app.

Of course, I'm aware that US could block the tiktok web URL.

~~~
kerng
Current act being put in place seems to include the scenario

~~~
xigency
So we would literally install a national firewall to enforce this policy?
Regardless of the particulars, the big picture view of this is not pretty. Is
there a legal group looking to challenge this yet, like the EFF?

------
Firebrand
What good is temporarily banning TikTok if Oracle and Walmart are taking
majority ownership?

The user base will see the headlines that it’s being banned and then they’ll
move to a rival service again like they did during the first scare. Especially
since Triller just poached TikTok’s most popular creator, Charli D’Amelio,
earlier this week. That coveted preteen demographic might never come back.
It’s poisoning the well for Oracle.

~~~
voidmain0001
Why is preteen a coveted demographic for a business? Are you able to point me
to something I can read that would explain why a business wants to court what
to me seems like a financially handcuffed group? I understand that preteens
can influence their guardians into making a purchase for a toy or some other
small ticket item, but they're not going to influence big ticket purchases. Or
do they?

~~~
Infinitesimus
Armchair perspective: They are an easily impressionable group who will
eventually get access to money. Building brand loyalty now could pay dividends
in their later years. Plus, children to have a certain influence in what their
guardians buy for them in many cases ( consider how profitable Disney's
merchandise is).

~~~
voidmain0001
Yes I thought of that too, but the parent to my question stated that Tiller is
already replacing TikTok. Clearly this demographic doesn't have brand loyalty.
It's not difficult/costly for them to jump ship from an existing platform to
another one. By the time preteens have access to Money TikTok, Tiller and
their followers will be replaced at least twice over.

------
whoevercares
So could I switch region on App Store and download it to my phone within US?
Or that’s physically blocked at the networking layer??

~~~
chrischen
It’s possible they may be forced to detect by IP, at which point using a VPN
may be necessary.

~~~
whoevercares
Smells like an US version of GFW (but much benign, totally not Trying to make
a comparison- don’t judge/downvote me)

------
xnx
Would be nice if we could turn this into an argument over data portability. If
there was a service an app that migrated data out of TikTok to a clone
service, I'd switch. Imagine if users could easily move their posts, photos,
friends, etc. out of Facebook to another system.

------
Semaphor
I’m reading a lot about reciprocity. I don’t really know about international
trade, does anyone have other examples where US reciprocity includes banning
(specifically, not because they are breaking a law) certain goods? And are
there examples of consumer goods amongst them?

------
dirtyid
Is tiktok web getting the ban hammer as well, will US implement their own
great firewall in response. Wonder if the future is more native web apps to
circumvent app store layer, which erode US control over mobile ecosystem.

------
jampa
I fear they honestly wont stop at app banning now that it has a precedent and
apparently lots of people are cheering for it, like the
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_)...
poem:

"First they came for chinese apps, but I didn't speak up for I didn't use
chinese apps.[...] Then they came for E2E apps..."

Honestly this all could be mitigated if we had less dependency on app stores,
if iOS could send notifications from mobile Safari, WeChat could just migrate
to PWA and its most loyal users would follow.

It seems like yesterday (it was) that people on HN were supporting a digital
boomer equivalency of not allowing notifications because the web apparently
must always be a document serving thing just cause, and a UX problem of
websites asking a lot for notification must be met with removal of the
function.

------
throwaway4good
I wonder what European country TikTok international will move to?

------
curt15
This is why, despite Apple's admirable record of OS updates, I refuse to buy a
computer that's locked into a single source of software.

------
cblconfederate
Time to take services gradually off US companies. Why get caught in the
crossfire? I for one am glad my servers are in Germany.

------
ipsocannibal
Lets hope someone doesn't have a now unpatchable zero day or two laying around
for these apps.

------
bamboozled
The Great Wall of America

Freedom is slipping away...

------
president
A lot of people in this thread are missing the important context behind all of
this, which is that China has been declared an adversary to the US. It's not
just your average case of data privacy issues. It's an issue of a hostile
foreign adversary that is collecting data on users and utilizing these
platforms as propaganda tools.

------
supernova87a
By the way, how can ISPs shut down the traffic of WeChat? Is it using a
specific port?

------
freddybobs
So thinking beyond their stated reasoning - which doesn't make much sense
unless they do something similar to facebook and co, which they won't - makes
me wonder.

With this administration everything is overtly political and typically
defensive and/or misdirection.

* To ban something 'from China' appeals to his base. * Tiktok was used to 'humiliate' the president at his Tulsa 'comeback rally' * Trump is having 'issues' with Twitter and to a lesser extent Facebook and other social media. They are marking and removing posts for example.

[https://www.forbes.com/sites/abrambrown/2020/08/01/is-
this-t...](https://www.forbes.com/sites/abrambrown/2020/08/01/is-this-the-
real-reason-why-trump-wants-to-ban-tiktok/#3960f9a44aed)

Perhaps the larger theme here is to fire a warning shot at Twitter, Facebook
and to a lesser extent Google. If you mess with us and don't do what we want -
we can and will shut you down. Because 'national security'. Does that seem a
leap? Not really because foreign entities (in particular Russia) actively and
successfully use social media, against US interests.

Is this good? No. It's _really_ bad. This is classic Trump - distracting,
destructive, coercing, nonsensical, abusive and chaotic. With even a small
amount of thought it can be seen to be smoke and mirrors.

A strong argument can be made that social media is a big problem in the US,
for a variety of reasons, including national security. That this step is
_nothing_ to do with trying to fix that, and everything to do with the failing
and flailing administration.

------
aaron695
So we have all weekend to find a security exploit.

That as of Monday can't be patched in the USA?

------
detaro
another thread here:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24515461](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24515461)

------
hujun
come on, all these discussions focus on privacy, but this ban is never about
protecting privacy.

------
hnaccy
Are Apple and Google going to fight this and leave the app up?

I hope they do, I dislike president having power to ban services and apps at
will.

------
DLay
TikTok’s interim CEO Vanessa Pappas asks Facebook and Instagram to support
their litigation against Trump’s executive order:

[https://twitter.com/v_ness/status/1306956276761415681?s=21](https://twitter.com/v_ness/status/1306956276761415681?s=21)

------
naiveprogrammer
I have no doubt that had TikTok been a Russian app and its ultimate
stakeholder were the Russian government, some of you here would have no
problem with the ban. I am really tired of the double standard.

But most importantly, what the US is applying is plain and old-fashioned
Reciprocity trade rules. It is a completely valid and accepted course of
action. If China closes its market to US-based social network companies, then
the US should do the same. It happens everywhere and you don't see people
screaming bloody murder because of it.

In my opinion, it is about time. Not only we are creating a disadvantage to
our local companies (FB, Whatsapp, etc), we are inviting a hostile agent to
openly collect information on our citizens. I understand that some here want a
more stringent policy concerning privacy and data collection. I think it is a
fair point, but it is not mutually exclusive here.

------
bosswipe
I've been suspicious of Trump's motivations on Tiktok ever since the story
came out about teens using tiktok to disrupt a Trump rally in June
[https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/21/politics/tiktok-trump-
tulsa-r...](https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/21/politics/tiktok-trump-tulsa-
rally/index.html)

------
Simulacra
Chinese American relations should be reciprocal, we should treat them the way
they treat us. If our apps and services cannot operate freely in their
country, they should not be allowed to abuse our country to collect data for
their intelligence operations. I’m very confused why so many on HN are so pro
China, despite it being the poster child for genocide and human rights abuses.

~~~
president
> I’m very confused why so many on HN are so pro China, despite it being the
> poster child for genocide and human rights abuses.

I go out of my way to comment on any posts related to China since it's a
subject that I have studied immensely and am very interested in and I have
noticed that anything I post that is slightly negative about China will get
downvoted or flagged. I've chalked it up to the fact that HN is filled with
people that are:

\- opposed to anything (and everything) Trump does including clamping down on
China

\- opposed to anything (and everything) the US does. This includes US people
and outsiders.

\- native Chinese HN users/bots downvoting any content that is negative about
China

~~~
president
Looks like they've struck again ;). These people don't want discourse or
facts, they just want to shape the narrative. Shame on them.

------
drummer
> it will be illegal to host or transfer internet traffic associated with
> WeChat".

I hope people realize how dangerous these developments are.

~~~
newacct583
They don't. It's absolutely horrifying the extent to which posters even here
want to treat this as a legitimate subject worthy of debate. The executive
branch, with minimal warning, minimal justification, less than seven weeks out
from an election, is just capriciously deciding to ban popular platforms for
online interaction. There's no congressional oversight, there's no proposed
legislation, it's not even a request to a court. It's just, "poof", you're
banned. Of platforms that have hundreds of millions of users in the country!

If that doesn't scare you imagine what your "enemies" might do with that
power.

I mean, it's true that I too don't personally don't see much value in these
platforms and am genuinely confused by TikTok. But... yikes.

People: this is a disaster. And once that power is uncorked it's not going
back in the bottle.

~~~
coldcode
TikTok is one thing, but WeChat is essentially an operating system for
everyone in China. I wonder if they will demand WeChat be removed from the App
Store everywhere. Given you can't do any commerce, a US company (like Apple)
likely cannot comply with this ruling without banning the whole app.

~~~
Udik
At which point I think China should ban iPhones. You cannot allow a company to
sell to your country a product from which your country's most important
applications are banned.

~~~
perennate
Yes, it would be great for the American people if China bans iPhones -- Apple
would have less of an economic incentive to follow arbitrary and brutally
repressive takedown demands from the CCP government like this:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19997188](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19997188)

Also, hope the US bans Xiaomi phones for the same reason, since applications
like Facebook don't appear in the Mi Store.

------
perseusprime11
Shutting TikTok is a good thing for the society at large.

------
jariel
I think there are legit issues with the CCP having access to massive amounts
of US user data, particularly from WeChat.

But the Commerce order does not highlight the risks, moreover, they don't
bother to give specific examples of concern.

The gov. should do a much, much better job at illustrating specific scenarios,
cases, impacts, outcomes in order to legitimize the action.

~~~
jimktrains2
I think there are legit issues with the US having access to a massive amount
of US users' data, particularly from Facebook and Google.

~~~
jariel
That's also fair.

But there are laws, policies, judicial procedures regarding how the US gov.
can access that data, specifically a warrant would be required for access to
information. Moreover, information is accessed on the basis of some ostensible
crime.

Aside from basic censorship of anything and everything, the CCP can use (and
does) WeChat information for absolutely whatever purposes it chooses at any
time.

If you say something about Hong Kong protests on WeChat - you will be flagged
(and censored) and every one of your peers will be flagged as well. Your
career, ability to move freely, future job prospects are in jeopardy, let
alone the possibility of completely arbitrary imprisoned. There is no 'justice
system' to speak of within that framework.

And of course, there are more basic issues of trade - there are zero foreign
entities that would be able to operate in China on basic, civil terms. They
all have to operate as organs of the state.

The CCP ensures compliance of it's authoritarian policies by having units
within private organizations specifically for that purpose. Have a read [1].
It's not a 'conspiracy' it's just how they operate.

There's no way on earth we can allow those types of organizations to operate
freely here.

So yes - just as TT and WeChat are banned or changed hands, there should be
more action to at least have more transparency on who, what and how the US can
access information from FB etc..

This is right at the core of the issue of the globalization of information and
it has to be addressed, there's no way around it.

[1] [https://thediplomat.com/2019/12/politics-in-the-boardroom-
th...](https://thediplomat.com/2019/12/politics-in-the-boardroom-the-role-of-
chinese-communist-party-committees/)

~~~
jimktrains2
The US government collects data which is arguably not legal to collect, and
parallel construction schemes have allowed law enforcement to use data it
would otherwise be unable to use.

I'm not defending the CCP's actions, but I think instead of banning specific
acts, the US should change policy and guidelines to ban behavior, not specific
actors.

------
drummer
This is why app stores and locked platforms such as Apple's are dangerous.
Users are going to have difficulty installing banned apps. Sure, wechat and
tik tok are basically spyware but this is just the beginning. Pretty soon
other apps are going to follow. One day signal might be on the list.

~~~
abc-xyz
This is why I’ve been supporting Apple and their App Store. It’s the most
effective way to isolate an evil, authoritarian regime.

Right now there’s zero reason to believe that the administration would target
apps outside of China, and as long as that continue to be the case then we
should cheer them on and be grateful we finally have a world leader willing
and capable of standing up to China.

------
imchillyb
> Tencent is the world's largest video game vendor, as well as one of the most
> financially valuable companies. It is among the largest social media,
> venture capital, and investment corporations. Its services include social
> network, music, web portals, e-commerce, mobile games, internet services,
> payment systems, smartphones, and multiplayer online games.

Is it any wonder /at all/ why the US Federal government, and every single
competitor in the US is worried about them?

Chinese Government is Tencent is Wechat, Fortnite, PubG along with many other
Game&Tech companies.

Allowing more influence in our markets, by the Chinese government is a /horri-
bad/ idea; period.

Blah blah blah, tech companies. Blah blah blah, open markets.

You DO realize how large a threat to open markets the Chinese State is, right?

[https://www.wired.com/story/chinese-hackers-taiwan-
semicondu...](https://www.wired.com/story/chinese-hackers-taiwan-
semiconductor-industry-skeleton-key/)

Right?!?!?

