Welcome to Incremental Social! Learn more about this project here!
Check out lemmyverse to find more communities to join from here!

DradoTheHobbit ,
@DradoTheHobbit@lemmy.eco.br avatar

I wonder how strange your own public policies must be to accept a situation like this... don't they see the impact this will have on thousands of people who literally need this platform? I don't think so... the American big tech lobby has the loudest voice, right?

thatirishguyyy , (edited )
@thatirishguyyy@lemmy.today avatar

Oh god. Don't tell me this is a pro-hamas post. All it is missing is idiots calling everything hasbara or some other buzz word.

China doesn't allow any other apps in their country so why should America allow Chinese apps? America shouldn't keep Chinese malware out of our networks because... ya'll are addicted to TikTok?

This isn't about Palestine. Not everything is hasbara and because of Israel. TikTok isn't the voice of freedom or reason. Ya'll just brainwashed by Chinese algorithms designed to upset the user base. The algorithm is doing what it is supposed to do: create division.

Edit: spelling

Sami_Uso ,

No this post actually is Hamas. Please tell Israel quickly

PiratePanPan ,
@PiratePanPan@lemmy.dbzer0.com avatar

BREAKING: Israel dronestrikes lemmy.world servers, points to potential Hamas base inside storage drives

sailingbythelee ,

I agree with you. The CCP classifies recommendation algorithms in a category similar to defense secrets. It isn't just Tiktok that can't be sold to non-Chinese, it is all recommendation algorithms. They know damn well what effect these algorithms have on a population.

febra ,

The free market for me but not for thee

kikutwo ,

US apps all banned in China.

febra ,

Yeah, that's true, but China doesn't claim to be a beacon of capitalism

Sethayy ,

"Well he did it first" is really not how I want a government to be run tbh

recapitated ,

All parties involved are asinine. The lawmakers, the company, both governments, the voters and the users.

kandoh ,

China should force apple to sell off it's Chinese business to a Chinese company.

TwinTusks ,

China doesn't need to, Apple is complying with Chinese law (remove all vpn related apps, all un-registered foreign app are removed and storing Chinese datas in Chinese servers).

Apple is likely the most complying foreign company in China.

Henry ,
@Henry@lemmy.zip avatar

yes mate, they recently delete WhatsApp, which is already blocked, from China App Store. I think it is because WhatsApp has a new setting for proxy. LOL

NoLifeGaming ,

I honestly don't like tiktok but this is clearly done to censor the pro palestine content and for exposing the US gov along many others as hypocrites

spongebue ,

This has been discussed way longer than 10/7/2023.

bamboo ,

What happened on July 10th, 2023?

Obligatory XKCD

spongebue ,

Ah yeah. I deserve that but to be fair the OP story (not the comment I replied to) is about what's happening in the US!

sugar_in_your_tea ,

And to be fair, our timestamps suck.

spongebue ,

Zero arguments there!

melpomenesclevage ,

but curiously now is when it was acted on.

NoLifeGaming ,

True, I remember talks about it being acquired by a US company but I think this really pushed it over the edge for them

melpomenesclevage ,

yep. Facebook's still running strong, and that company has been a part of how many fucking genocides now?

thatirishguyyy ,
@thatirishguyyy@lemmy.today avatar

Clearly 🙃

EmperorHenry ,
@EmperorHenry@discuss.tchncs.de avatar

And the floodgates are opened, washing us down the slippery slope of all kinds of new censorship

febra ,

Biden signs bill criticized as “major expansion of warrantless surveillance”

This also happened a few days ago

Linkerbaan ,
@Linkerbaan@lemmy.world avatar

Whew the propaganda smokescreen almost fully fell apart with people waking up and seeing us support Genocide. Good thing we went full authoritarianism to stop it!

McDropout ,
@McDropout@lemmy.world avatar

Free speech was always a lie I guess

baseless_discourse , (edited )

Oh no, this includes "aids" to Israel isn't it...

Why the hell do Israel needs more money?! They are not even close to poor...

exanime ,

It's not about that.... It's about feeding the porks of the military industrial complex

melpomenesclevage ,

theres enough corruption to go around, dear. something can have more than one abhorrent cause.

melpomenesclevage ,

pay for each Palestinian murdered, raped, or tortured.

KillingTimeItself ,

we are now in the process of cooking my friends.

Support your local darknet if you do not like censorship and violation of our rights

It's free :)

shasta ,

we are now in the process of cooking my friends

Would you like some A1 sauce with your rack of Nathan?

KillingTimeItself ,

i would just like to experience nature in solitude my friend. That is all.

sugar_in_your_tea ,

Ew. I looked through the bill, and here are some parts I have issues with:

Main text

PROHIBITION OF FOREIGN ADVERSARY CON -
TROLLED APPLICATIONS .—It shall be unlawful for an entity to distribute, maintain, or update (or enable the distribution, maintenance, or updating of) a foreign adversary controlled application by carrying out, within the land or maritime borders of the United States, any of the following:

(A) Providing services to distribute, main-
tain, or update such foreign adversary con-
trolled application (including any source code of
such application) by means of a marketplace
(including an online mobile application store)
through which users within the land or maritime borders of the United States may access,
maintain, or update such application.

(B) Providing internet hosting services to
enable the distribution, maintenance, or updating of such foreign adversary controlled application for users within the land or maritime borders of the United States.

So basically, the US can block any form of software (not just social media) distributed by an adversary county for pretty much reason, and it can block any company providing access to anything from an adversary.

Definition of "controlled by a foreign adversary"

(g) DEFINITIONS .—In this section:6
(1) CONTROLLED BY A FOREIGN ADVERSARY .—
The term ‘‘controlled by a foreign adversary’’ means, with respect to a covered company or other entity, that such company or other entity is--

(A) a foreign person that is domiciled in,
is headquartered in, has its principal place of
business in, or is organized under the laws of
a foreign adversary country;

(B) an entity with respect to which a for-
eign person or combination of foreign persons
described in subparagraph (A) directly or indi-
rectly own at least a 20 percent stake; or

(C) a person subject to the direction or
control of a foreign person or entity described
in subparagraph (A) or (B).

The adversary countries are (defined in a separate US code):

  • N. Korea
  • China
  • Russia
  • Iran

So if you live in any of these or work for a company based in any of these, you're subject to the law.

foreign adversary company definition

(3) FOREIGN ADVERSARY CONTROLLED APPLI -
CATION .—The term ‘‘foreign adversary controlled
application’’ means a website, desktop application, mobile application, or augmented or immersive technology application that is operated, directly or indirectly (including through a parent company, subsidiary, or affiliate), by—

(A) any of—

(i) ByteDance, Ltd.;

(ii) TikTok;

(iii) a subsidiary of or a successor to
an entity identified in clause (i) or (ii) that
is controlled by a foreign adversary; or

(iv) an entity owned or controlled, di-
rectly or indirectly, by an entity identified
in clause (i), (ii), or (iii); or

(B) a covered company that—

(i) is controlled by a foreign adversary; and

(ii) that is determined by the President to present a significant threat to the national security of the United States following the issuance of—

It specifically calls out TikTok and ByteDance, but it also allows the President to denote any other entity in one of those countries as a significant threat.

So here are my issues:

  • I, as a US citizen, can't choose to distribute software produced by an adversary as noted officially by the US government - this is a limitation on my first amendment protections, and I think this applies to FOSS if the original author is from one of those countries
  • the barrier to what counts is relatively low - just living in an adversary country or working for a company based on an adversary country seems to don't
  • barrier to a "covered company" is relatively low and probably easy to manipulate - basically needs 1M active users (not even US users), which the CIA could totally generate if needed

So I think the bill is way too broad (lots of "or"s), and I'm worried it could allow the government to ban competition with US company competitors. It's not as bad as I feared, but I still think it's harmful.

Anyway, thoughts?

Eezyville ,
@Eezyville@sh.itjust.works avatar

Isn't Nginx written by a Russian? So is it now banned in the US? What other software has been effected by this legislation?

porksoda ,

Hah, well time to tell our CEO I'm shutting down our prod servers.

Maggoty ,

Don't worry an American will be available to own it instead! And there won't be any problems because we're the best!

jecht360 ,
@jecht360@lemmy.world avatar

You missed the /s in your comment.

BigBananaDealer ,
@BigBananaDealer@lemm.ee avatar

no comment needs an /s

Maggoty ,

I shouldn't need one for that. But in the same vein...

I don't know what you're talking about, it's impossible for the world's only bastion of freedom to do anything wrong! We should just have the president and do away with things like courts!

el_abuelo ,

Woops! You forgot the /s again

Maggoty ,

Dang it. I'll remember one of these days.

exanime ,

Tetris....

sugar_in_your_tea ,

No, but it could be. The President would need to start the process and give them 270 days to relocate to somewhere that's not Russia or sell to a non-Russian company or whatever.

Maltese_Liquor ,

I'm not sure it would cover open source software since it seems to be more concerned with data than the actual code. If that open source software is being used by a company controlled by a foreign adversary then that would probably apply but if it's open source software created by a foreign adversary but being used by a US company I don't think that would.

The actual wording of the bill seems pretty vague so I could be wrong and they might be able to apply it just to software but that would kind of to against the entire option B that they're currently giving ByteDance where they can keep Tik Tok running by selling it to an American company.

KillingTimeItself ,

literally all you would have to do for OSS is just fork it to someone living in america, and develop it from there.

sugar_in_your_tea ,

The actual wording of the bill seems pretty vague

And that's the issue. Yeah, it probably won't apply to FOSS today, but times change and maybe it will in 10+ years.

Maggoty ,

Thoughts? Someone turned a troll farm loose on this one. We've been getting ratioed for weeks saying this and now all the shills screaming that we must support the CCP and hate our own country because it's an obvious national security measure are gone. Ones that suspiciously needed the Constitution explained to them at the most basic level.

We got played by the people that are supposed to represent us.

sugar_in_your_tea ,

It's not that bad, but I do think it's bad, and I outlined why. But my concerns aren't with whether TikTok is good or bad (I think it's bad, hence why I don't use it), I'm more concerned with granting the federal government even more power with vaguely written laws.

The CCP can burn to the ground as far as I care.

Razzazzika ,

Doesn't that mean games like Genshin Impact and Honkai by Chinese companies like HoYo will be banned then too in the states?

sugar_in_your_tea ,

No, but it probably could be. I think Fortnite also qualifies.

The bill only allows the federal government to require companies to sell or be banned, it doesn't ban anything on its own.

spongebue ,

"Hello, we are ClickClock, a totally different (😉😉😉) social media company hoping to fill the void of that one social media company that recently went under. As a matter of fact, with their recent layoffs we were even able to hire much of their talent and stuff. But totally different!"

That's about how trivial it would be to get around this if the legislation was too specific

sugar_in_your_tea ,

Sure, and the more general it is, the more likely the government can get away with shady stuff, like the NSA did with the FISA rubber stamp courts.

This doesn't seem nearly as bad as that, but I also don't think the stakes are all that high if they make things too specific.

reverendsteveii ,

once again - not a ban, a seizure. Steve Mnuchin is heading a group of government insiders who want to buy TikTok, and this bill bans it if and only if they don't sell. The government has decided that TikTok is a dangerous propaganda and espionage network and intends to steal it and run it themselves. Even if you think that TikTok is that dangerous you have to ask yourself: why is it legal for everyone else and why does our government want so badly to do it themselves?

PresidentCamacho ,

Because then Facebook will pay for your reelection campaign?

RedAggroBest ,

First off, source? Second, the npr interview I heard mentioned specifically that China has to approve the sale because the algorithm is proprietary to a Chinese company. So anyone "buying TikTok" is buying a name and none of the actual bones of the social media platform

reverendsteveii , (edited )

source?

First page when you google 'Steve Mnuchin'

the npr interview I heard

source?

bamboo ,

Not who you were replying to, and not an interview, but here's an NPR article that explains that the content-recommendation algorithms would be difficult to sell

Chinese officials have placed content-recommendation algorithms on what is known as an export-control list, meaning the government has additional say over how the technology is ever sold.

reverendsteveii ,

Neat, ty!

LifeInMultipleChoice , (edited )

Aren't the bones the cheap part now? Think truth social for instance, why was it supposedly worth so much if anyone can spin up a Mastadon instance and make it the same restrictions over the weekend. The userbase numbers are all that mattered there I assume. Why is reddit worth more than Lemmy? Is it because the bones are expensive? Or is it that they have access to a large userbase already.

KillingTimeItself ,

the reason truth social was so highly valued is probably related to trumps chronic addiction to over valuing his assets by about 10-100x the original value of them.

you would think the userbase of truth social would be big, it's not. It's several orders of magnitude smaller than twitter, and it's value is theorized to be heavily independent of the actual user count, the board of truth literally said as much. I.E. basically fucking bullshit.

Buttons ,
@Buttons@programming.dev avatar

If China really is using TikTok for psyops, then they will refused to sell, flood TikTok with anti-government sentiment for its remaining days, and then direct people to just use the TikTok website hosted in China (is our government going to start blocking access to websites too?).

One silver line here is "the youths" will learn, in an unusually clear way, that the government effects their lives and can screw up their lives.

Maggoty ,

You know TikTok is global right?

But yeah Biden is just over here casually giving Trump better chances.

bamboo ,

If ByteDance doesn't divest of TikTok 9 months, then it will be blocked from being distributed from App Stores. Nothing will be blocked before the election, so it's not really something which will affect the typical voter who isn't following the news, causing them to change their vote.

Maggoty ,

It's major news. We're not that dumb.

eldavi , (edited )

One silver line here is “the youths” will learn, in an unusually clear way, that the government effects their lives and can screw up their lives.

this happened to be back in the 90's & 00's when biden et al. spearheaded non-dischargeable student loan debt; anti-gay marriage; and a ban on gays in the military and now i'm permanently anti democrat party.

however i don't think think that this will have the same impact depth because being denied videos does not have the same impact on your life as your government deporting the person you built a life with because you can't sponsor them for legal residency simply due to the fact you're both the same sex and being driven towards taking on huge student loan debt because the military won't let you join to obtain the college tuition part of GI bill.

in addition: people will brand you a tankie or a "both-sides-ist" for pointing out these anti-gay & anti-youth laws online; so today's youth will be pressured away from giving voice to it publicly.

Buttons ,
@Buttons@programming.dev avatar

I can understand your frustration. I currently feel that way towards a certain political party, but I have to keep an open mind because things change.

For example, I don't doubt what you said Democrats was true in past decades, but today I believe the Democrats are more friendly towards LGBT rights than Republicans are. It appears things have changed on those specific issues.

Maybe we wont agree, but let's at lets at least find clarity: Do you believe Republicans or Democrats are currently more friendly towards LGBT people?

eldavi , (edited )

like abortion, the democrats did nothing when they had the chance and; in my case and many others like me; they actively made it worse.

it was hollywood that changed people's minds on lgbt issues and democrats are simply the political beneficiaries.

Buttons ,
@Buttons@programming.dev avatar

All fair criticisms of Democrats in my opinion.

The only thing I have a problem with is your "never vote Democrat" rule. You do you, but I believe voting in a way that will most help LGBT people, and most help women's reproductive rights, etc--I believe that if you want to cast votes that most support those causes, it will sometimes require voting for a Democrat.

Ellecram ,

I will always vote Democrat.

eldavi ,

i've voted democrat before and will likely again; it's fascinating how people interpret a message in a way that wasn't said and that's not meant as an indictment on you.

Buttons ,
@Buttons@programming.dev avatar

Earlier you said:

i’m permanently anti democrat party

and I read that as "I will never vote democrat". I see now that's not what you said.

I too would love to see us do better than the two deeply flawed parties we have now. I wish we had a better voting system that allowed better parties.

eldavi ,

I too would love to see us do better than the two deeply flawed parties we have now. I wish we had a better voting system that allowed better parties.

i can understand the "better red than dead" voters because they're getting what they want; so i mostly blame the "vote blue no matter who" voters because they have never gotten what they want and continue to believe that choosing the lesser evil option will somehow make things better even though it never has and never will.

Buttons ,
@Buttons@programming.dev avatar

Also, to get that clarity I was seeking. Do you:

  1. Recommend people vote for Democrats (sounds like no).
  2. Recommend people vote for Republicans.
  3. Recommend people vote for third-parties or not vote at all.

These are the only 3 possibilities. Which are you?

For example, if you believe that Republicans are better for LGBT issues, then I want to hear you say it: "I think Republicans are better on LGBT issues". I have my own opinion on this which I will keep to myself, I really just want you to be clear about your view and then let everyone judge for themselves what they think is right.

eldavi ,

vote for a third party if you're in a safely red or blue state and vote your conscience otherwise.

KillingTimeItself ,

i’m permanently anti democrat party.

thats a person issue not a democrat issue.

to be fair the people who bitch about "both sidesing" generally have a point, centrists fucking suck dude.

Centrists will pull some shit like "well maybe, we shouldn't ban gay marriage, but we should still restrict their rights, it's only fair right?"

eldavi ,

martin luther king called them moderates and he agreed with both of us.

the problem is that moderates today call leftists they don't like tankies and other leftists agree; effectively proving king's point to be true.

KillingTimeItself ,

istg politics fucks up everything it touches.

We can't have anything nice and this is why.

eldavi ,

unfortunately for me and many others like me, politics is life due to simply existing at the intersection of every major national political topic for the last 35 years.

calling it "politics" divorces it from reality and frames it as purely theoretical even though it's not true; anyone calling it that is either clueless, privileged, or dog whistling. (sometimes 2 or all 3).

KillingTimeItself ,

see that's the problem though, it's literally not life. You can go through the great depression without dying (probably)

Politics not existing for a little while isn't going to kill someone.

90% of politics is just performative bullshit anyway.

reverendsteveii ,

this happened to be back in the 90’s & 00’s when biden et al. spearheaded non-dischargeable student loan debt; anti-gay marriage; and a ban on gays in the military and now i’m permanently anti the party that rolled back don't ask don't tell, embraced marriage and healthcare rights for queer people and have forgiven tons of student loan debt. I'm definitely not a psy-op. Pay no attention to the fact that no one calls them 'the democrat party' except people who have 1000+ hours viewing fox news.

eldavi , (edited )

sure, now that it's politically popular; nevermind that they did nothing to make that a reality and made it worse instead of standing up for us after promising that they would.

UnderpantsWeevil ,
@UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world avatar

(is our government going to start blocking access to websites too?).

I can't imagine why they wouldn't. The movie industry is already lobbying for it

Maggoty ,

Yup. And the precedent this sets is horrifying. Even monopolies get due process. Being able to declare a company as a foreign enemy and force them to leave the market or be bought out is a ridiculous measure in a supposedly free society.

melpomenesclevage ,

so they can do the death penalty on a company, they have a model

they just don't do it to Exxon or Facebook or Monsanto or...

Sam_Bass ,

Seriously doubt it will kill it

Nom ,
@Nom@lemm.ee avatar

At best it'll create another spin-off like the hundreds that already exist on the app/play stores.

Sam_Bass ,

No doubt

ouRKaoS ,

I dont use tiktok, but I might actually download a FossTok just to normalize FOSS for the masses.

guywithoutaname ,

It won't, but it will be sold, and the moderation and censorship practices will change.

Sam_Bass ,

Ok who's gonna buy it?

darkevilmac ,
@darkevilmac@lemmy.zip avatar

Pretty sure last time around there were potential buyers. I think Walmart was one of them, and so was Oracle.

I imagine we'll see the same names pop up again.

WoahWoah ,

Steve Mnuchin.

Sam_Bass ,

Long as it aint musk or bezos or gates

reverendsteveii ,

if this thing is being sold because it's a propaganda and data mining risk, selling it to a cohort of government insiders doesn't make me feel better.

nondescripthandle ,

If there wasn't a grift in progress they would have banned it in totality instead of banning only if they dont sell.

Maggoty ,

Lmao. Sure buddy.

femboy_bird ,
@femboy_bird@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

I didn't know it was legal for a law to make it through the senate that fast

crusa187 ,

lol

nah it’s legit, just look at any of the military spending bills which rocket through at warp speed

femboy_bird ,
@femboy_bird@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

Oh that's why it passed so fast, it was the aid package that was bundled with it

FiniteBanjo , (edited )

As of the Resolving Differences phase this is where we are at with the text of the bill.

BTW, not a ban. It was never a ban.

Click to Expand

DIVISION I—PROTECTING AMERICANS’ DATA FROM FOREIGN ADVERSARIES ACT OF 2024

SEC. 1. SHORT TITLE.
This division may be cited as the “Protecting Americans’ Data from Foreign Adversaries Act of 2024”.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON TRANSFER OF PERSONALLY IDENTIFIABLE SENSITIVE DATA OF UNITED STATES INDIVIDUALS TO FOREIGN ADVERSARIES.
(a) Prohibition.—It shall be unlawful for a data broker to sell, license, rent, trade, transfer, release, disclose, provide access to, or otherwise make available personally identifiable sensitive data of a United States individual to—

(1) any foreign adversary country; or

(2) any entity that is controlled by a foreign adversary.

(b) Enforcement By Federal Trade Commission.—

(1) UNFAIR OR DECEPTIVE ACTS OR PRACTICES.—A violation of this section shall be treated as a violation of a rule defining an unfair or a deceptive act or practice under section 18(a)(1)(B) of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 57a(a)(1)(B)).

(2) POWERS OF COMMISSION.—

(A) IN GENERAL.—The Commission shall enforce this section in the same manner, by the same means, and with the same jurisdiction, powers, and duties as though all applicable terms and provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 41 et seq.) were incorporated into and made a part of this section.

(B) PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES.—Any person who violates this section shall be subject to the penalties and entitled to the privileges and immunities provided in the Federal Trade Commission Act.

(3) AUTHORITY PRESERVED.—Nothing in this section may be construed to limit the authority of the Commission under any other provision of law.

(c) Definitions.—In this section:

(1) COMMISSION.—The term “Commission” means the Federal Trade Commission.

(2) CONTROLLED BY A FOREIGN ADVERSARY.—The term “controlled by a foreign adversary” means, with respect to an individual or entity, that such individual or entity is—

(A) a foreign person that is domiciled in, is headquartered in, has its principal place of business in, or is organized under the laws of a foreign adversary country;

(B) an entity with respect to which a foreign person or combination of foreign persons described in subparagraph (A) directly or indirectly own at least a 20 percent stake; or

(C) a person subject to the direction or control of a foreign person or entity described in subparagraph (A) or (B).

(3) DATA BROKER.—

(A) IN GENERAL.—The term “data broker” means an entity that, for valuable consideration, sells, licenses, rents, trades, transfers, releases, discloses, provides access to, or otherwise makes available data of United States individuals that the entity did not collect directly from such individuals to another entity that is not acting as a service provider.

(B) EXCLUSION.—The term “data broker” does not include an entity to the extent such entity—

(i) is transmitting data of a United States individual, including communications of such an individual, at the request or direction of such individual;

(ii) is providing, maintaining, or offering a product or service with respect to which personally identifiable sensitive data, or access to such data, is not the product or service;

(iii) is reporting or publishing news or information that concerns local, national, or international events or other matters of public interest;

(iv) is reporting, publishing, or otherwise making available news or information that is available to the general public—

(I) including information from—

(aa) a book, magazine, telephone book, or online directory;

(bb) a motion picture;

(cc) a television, internet, or radio program;

(dd) the news media; or

(ee) an internet site that is available to the general public on an unrestricted basis; and

(II) not including an obscene visual depiction (as such term is used in section 1460 of title 18, United States Code); or

(v) is acting as a service provider.

(4) FOREIGN ADVERSARY COUNTRY.—The term “foreign adversary country” means a country specified in section 4872(d)(2) of title 10, United States Code.

(5) PERSONALLY IDENTIFIABLE SENSITIVE DATA.—The term “personally identifiable sensitive data” means any sensitive data that identifies or is linked or reasonably linkable, alone or in combination with other data, to an individual or a device that identifies or is linked or reasonably linkable to an individual.

(6) PRECISE GEOLOCATION INFORMATION.—The term “precise geolocation information” means information that—

(A) is derived from a device or technology of an individual; and

(B) reveals the past or present physical location of an individual or device that identifies or is linked or reasonably linkable to 1 or more individuals, with sufficient precision to identify street level location information of an individual or device or the location of an individual or device within a range of 1,850 feet or less.

(7) SENSITIVE DATA.—The term “sensitive data” includes the following:

(A) A government-issued identifier, such as a Social Security number, passport number, or driver’s license number.

(B) Any information that describes or reveals the past, present, or future physical health, mental health, disability, diagnosis, or healthcare condition or treatment of an individual.

(C) A financial account number, debit card number, credit card number, or information that describes or reveals the income level or bank account balances of an individual.

(D) Biometric information.

(E) Genetic information.

(F) Precise geolocation information.

(G) An individual’s private communications such as voicemails, emails, texts, direct messages, mail, voice communications, and video communications, or information identifying the parties to such communications or pertaining to the transmission of such communications, including telephone numbers called, telephone numbers from which calls were placed, the time calls were made, call duration, and location information of the parties to the call.

(H) Account or device log-in credentials, or security or access codes for an account or device.

(I) Information identifying the sexual behavior of an individual.

(J) Calendar information, address book information, phone or text logs, photos, audio recordings, or videos, maintained for private use by an individual, regardless of whether such information is stored on the individual’s device or is accessible from that device and is backed up in a separate location.

(K) A photograph, film, video recording, or other similar medium that shows the naked or undergarment-clad private area of an individual.

(L) Information revealing the video content requested or selected by an individual.

(M) Information about an individual under the age of 17.

(N) An individual’s race, color, ethnicity, or religion.

(O) Information identifying an individual’s online activities over time and across websites or online services.

(P) Information that reveals the status of an individual as a member of the Armed Forces.

(Q) Any other data that a data broker sells, licenses, rents, trades, transfers, releases, discloses, provides access to, or otherwise makes available to a foreign adversary country, or entity that is controlled by a foreign adversary, for the purpose of identifying the types of data listed in subparagraphs (A) through (P).

(8) SERVICE PROVIDER.—The term “service provider” means an entity that—

(A) collects, processes, or transfers data on behalf of, and at the direction of—

(i) an individual or entity that is not a foreign adversary country or controlled by a foreign adversary; or

(ii) a Federal, State, Tribal, territorial, or local government entity; and

(B) receives data from or on behalf of an individual or entity described in subparagraph (A)(i) or a Federal, State, Tribal, territorial, or local government entity.

(9) UNITED STATES INDIVIDUAL.—The term “United States individual” means a natural person residing in the United States.

(d) Effective Date.—This section shall take effect on the date that is 60 days after the date of the enactment of this division.

AmbiguousProps ,

It's always annoyed me that it's been commonly referred to as a ban, when it's actually a forced sale.

Corkyskog ,

It will be a different product for the consumer, so it's effectively a Tiktok ban in my eyes...

You think all my Palestinian and adjacent Tiktokers will still be in my feed once it's sold?

scoobford ,

Probably? There's a decent amount of people on reddit calling for the dissolution and expulsion of Israel. US based companies rarely censor on the whims of the feds.

FiniteBanjo ,

It's actually not even that, at least not yet, the bill text just empowers the FTC to do FTC stuff to the company.

Garry ,

If they don’t sell isn’t it a ban?

FiniteBanjo ,

They haven't technically been forced to sell either, the bill gives the FTC the authority to act against them. They still have the opportunity to stop sending copious amounts of Data to China, and if they continue then the FTC ruling will give them an ultimatum usually in the form of massive fines. It would be a weird timeline if China just paid the bill and kept spying, lol.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • technology@lemmy.world
  • incremental_games
  • meta
  • All magazines
    •