Comment by fredliu | Hacker News Reader

Comment by fredliu | Hacker News Reader

I'm risking losing a limb for saying this, but I would be much more comfortable if the EO clearly stated the main reason for the TikTok and WeChat ban is a retaliatory tit-for-tat against China's long time behavior of banning US tech companies operating in the Chinese market, which sounds like the main reason why many here support this ban.

Whether or not that tit-for-tat behavior leads to a net benefit for the US is up for debate. But the fact the EOs cite "national security", "privacy violation", etc. as the main reasons for banning makes you wonder "are those the real reasons behind this ban?" If they are, then questions raised by OP's article is perfectly legit, and makes the ban look either misplaced or hypocritical. If the ban really is tit-for-tat, what's stoping the EO from just saying so? Honestly, this whole situation makes the White House/Department of State look like they don't even believe those allegations themselves, which weakens their ground in any legitimate discussion around"national security threat" , "privacy violation" etc.

I don't really know how international trade law works, but a country can claim a national security exemption and avoid litigation in the WTO. National security has been cited throughout the trade war, including justifying steel tariffs on Canada.

This is simply guity by association. No matter what TikTok does, just because it's created by a Chinese domestic company, then all the political will are aligned behind the idea to automatically assume guilty, with even the slight trace of proof of the claimed misconduct.

Then there is guilty by association on China/CCP, based on their association with communism. Which by all accounts is largely nothing but name nowadays. CCP itself looks more like a capitalism organization than a communism party, on the spectrum from communism to capitalism. But most time, one random netizen wholeheartedly claims that CCP is evil, just based on it having communism in the name. Then anything Chinese people doing are tainted as well. Like I was called associated with Chinese government in [2], because I stated that "五毛" is being used too abusively, and "government hired net moderator" is probably better [3].

For god's sake, I am now routinely worried my future at this country, just because I come from mainland China...

[1] https://legaldictionary.net/guilt-by-association/ [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23494968 [3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23494950

"guilty by association" is easier to process mentally, for both sides. There is a case to be made that a lot of the online anti-China rhetorics could be attributed to the mentality of "because it's China", without digging into the individual allegations to see if they are on sound grounds. On the other hand, for the "pro-China" camp (no matter if you are in it by choice, or got thrown into it), it's very easy to attribute any criticism against China to "racism/they don't like China/The West is prejudiced against China" without looking into the validity of individual criticism. The great danger of the current day and age with social media, is that the mob on both sides will keep the divide deeper, giving politicians, from both side, the levers they want to achieve their own political goals, which may have nothing to do with the various issues that caused the divide in the first place. The reality is always nuanced, but sadly not convenient.

>No matter what TikTok does

In my opinion the claim of persecution based on origin is unfounded. The apps have demonstrated potentially illegal actions by gathering the data how they do. I don't think they are the only ones that do this in the market but that is besides the case. I hope more get unmasked. This EO may produce precedent in regining intrusive borederline illegal spying (intrusive data gathering) via social media sites and applications. POTUS does have the power to reign in companies operating in the US market especially when demonstrating potential harm to citizens.

I'm worried about the asymmetry of enforcement as much as you are. However, I wouldn't put it past the current POTUS to do something stupid and invalidate his athority.

>This is simply guity by association

You reap what you sow. When the CCP has great influence on the activities of chinese companies, it's only reasonable for foreigners to be suspicious. By the same token, it's only reasonable for Russia/China to be suspicious of backdoors in Microsoft/Intel, for instance.

>Then there is guilty by association on China/CCP, based on their association with communism.

This is getting into strawman territory. There's plenty of reasons to hate the CCP that doesn't involve "communism". Human rights abuses and the lack of civil liberties, for one.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com