• TikTok is owned by a Chinese company, and Chinese companies have to do what they’re told by the ruling Chinese Community Party (CCP), if they’re told to do something. (And of course they’re not allowed to say they’ve been told do so something. In that respect, it’s the same as most Western companies being required to do something by intelligence agencies or the police.)
The facts are more blurry.
This from yesterday's FT
The company is often described by western politicians as a “Chinese” entity. However, as I have noted before, some 60 per cent of the group is actually owned by “international” investors, overwhelmingly American. An estimated $8bn has been invested by private capital companies, including Sequoia Capital, Susquehanna, General Atlantic and Coatue Management. Mainstream investment funds such as Fidelity, T Rowe Price and BlackRock are exposed, too.
Wait, wait - Charles, you were around for "Net Neutrality" for example, and all the shenanigans that went on then. It's old hat by now to have companies running scare notices to their users about "Contact Congress, and tell them this proposal will cause the *ANTI-CHRIST APOCALYPSE*!!!". I doubt Congressional staff were puzzled. The FCC was really getting *death threats* sent about Net Neutrality, that's how crazy it got. High schoolers are absolutely bog-standard. And presumably much less disturbing than, e.g. adults upset over gun laws.
Note, I suspect that the House members learned at the national security briefing that the NSA could not get the sort of mass data access to TikTok that it can for Google, Amazon, X/Twitter, Meta/Facebook, etc. And this isn't an original thought by me. It's utterly obvious when one looks at the spying implications.
Note in the US, "motivating people to act politically" is a fully protected First Amendment business. Just like there's no "hate speech" exception, there's no "algorithm" exception.
This part:
The facts are simple:
• TikTok is owned by a Chinese company, and Chinese companies have to do what they’re told by the ruling Chinese Community Party (CCP), if they’re told to do something. (And of course they’re not allowed to say they’ve been told do so something. In that respect, it’s the same as most Western companies being required to do something by intelligence agencies or the police.)
The facts are more blurry.
This from yesterday's FT
The company is often described by western politicians as a “Chinese” entity. However, as I have noted before, some 60 per cent of the group is actually owned by “international” investors, overwhelmingly American. An estimated $8bn has been invested by private capital companies, including Sequoia Capital, Susquehanna, General Atlantic and Coatue Management. Mainstream investment funds such as Fidelity, T Rowe Price and BlackRock are exposed, too.
Wait, wait - Charles, you were around for "Net Neutrality" for example, and all the shenanigans that went on then. It's old hat by now to have companies running scare notices to their users about "Contact Congress, and tell them this proposal will cause the *ANTI-CHRIST APOCALYPSE*!!!". I doubt Congressional staff were puzzled. The FCC was really getting *death threats* sent about Net Neutrality, that's how crazy it got. High schoolers are absolutely bog-standard. And presumably much less disturbing than, e.g. adults upset over gun laws.
Note, I suspect that the House members learned at the national security briefing that the NSA could not get the sort of mass data access to TikTok that it can for Google, Amazon, X/Twitter, Meta/Facebook, etc. And this isn't an original thought by me. It's utterly obvious when one looks at the spying implications.
Note in the US, "motivating people to act politically" is a fully protected First Amendment business. Just like there's no "hate speech" exception, there's no "algorithm" exception.
The 'Future Ahead' video... I don't quite know what to make of it. Maybe thats a good sign.