Enlarge (credit: Future Publishing / Contributor | Future Publishing)
TikTok is now disputing a Reuters report that claims the short-video app is cloning its algorithm to potentially offer a different version of the app, which might degrade over time, just for US users.
Sources "with direct knowledge" of the project—granted anonymity because they're not authorized to discuss it publicly—told Reuters that the TikTok effort began late last year. They said that the project will
TikTok is now disputing a Reuters report that claims the short-video app is cloning its algorithm to potentially offer a different version of the app, which might degrade over time, just for US users.
Sources "with direct knowledge" of the project—granted anonymity because they're not authorized to discuss it publicly—told Reuters that the TikTok effort began late last year. They said that the project will likely take a year to complete, requiring hundreds of engineers to separate millions of lines of code.
As these sources reported, TikTok's tremendous undertaking could potentially help prepare its China-based owner ByteDance to appease US lawmakers who passed a law in April forcing TikTok to sell its US-based operations by January 19 or face a ban. But TikTok has maintained that the "qualified divestiture" required by the law would be impossible, and on Thursday, TikTok denied the accuracy of Reuters' report while reiterating its stance that a sale is not in the cards.
“Do you now, or have you ever, worked with TikTok to help defend its rights?”
That McCarthyism-esque question is apparently being asked by members of Congress to organizations that have been working with TikTok to defend its Constitutional rights.
Does anyone think it’s right for Congress to threaten to punish organizations from working with TikTok? Does that sound like a First Amendment violation to you? Because it sure does to me.
Over the last year or so, we’ve been hearing a lot of talk out
“Do you now, or have you ever, worked with TikTok to help defend its rights?”
That McCarthyism-esque question is apparently being asked by members of Congress to organizations that have been working with TikTok to defend its Constitutional rights.
Does anyone think it’s right for Congress to threaten to punish organizations from working with TikTok? Does that sound like a First Amendment violation to you? Because it sure does to me.
Over the last year or so, we’ve been hearing a lot of talk out of Congress on two specific issues: the supposed horrors of government officials suppressing speech and, at the same time, the supposed horrors of a successful social media app that has ties to China.
Would it surprise you to find that there are some hypocrites in Congress about all of this? Shocking, I know.
We already highlighted how a bunch of members of Congress both signed an amicus brief in the Murthy case saying that governments should never, ever, interfere with speech and also voted to ban TikTok. But, would those same members of Congress who are so worried about “jawboning” by government officials to suppress speech also then use the power of Congress to silence voices trying to defend TikTok?
Yeah, you know where this is going.
NetChoice has been the main trade group that has been defending against all the terrible laws being thrust upon the internet over the last few years. Often people dismiss NetChoice as “big tech” or “the tech industry,” but in my experience they’ve been solidly standing up for good and important internet speech policies. NetChoice has been structured to be independent of its members (i.e., they get to decide what cases they take on, not their members, which sometimes means their members dislike the causes and cases NetChoice takes on).
On Wednesday of this week, NetChoice’s membership roster looked like this:
I highlighted TikTok in particular, because on Thursday, NetChoice’s membership roster looked like this:
TikTok is missing.
Why? Well, because members of Congress threatened to investigate NetChoice if it didn’t drop TikTok from its roster. Politico had some of this story last night, claiming that there was pressure from Congress to drop TikTok:
“The Select Committee’s brazen efforts to intimidate private organizations for associating with a company with 170 million American users is a clear abuse of power that smacks of McCarthyism,” TikTok spokesperson Alex Haurek said in a statement, referring to the House China panel. “It’s a sad day when Members of Congress single out individual companies without evidence while trampling on constitutional rights and the democratic process,” Haurek added. A spokesperson for NetChoice didn’t respond to a request for comment.
The two people told Daniel that NetChoice faced pressure from the office of House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) to dump TikTok. A third person said that while no threat was made, NetChoice was told that the Select Committee on China would be investigating groups associated with TikTok and decided to sever ties as a result.
I’ve heard that the claim there was “no threat” is not accurate. As the rest of that paragraph makes clear, there was very much an implied threat that Congress would investigate organizations working with TikTok to defend its rights. I’m also hearing that others, like PR agencies and lobbying organizations that work with TikTok, are now facing similar threats from Congress.
Indeed, despite the “denial” of any threat, Politico gets the “House Select Committee on the CCP” to admit that it will launch an investigation into any organization that helps TikTok defend its rights:
“Significant bipartisan majorities in both the House and the Senate deemed TikTok a grave national security threat and the President signed a bill into law requiring them to divest from the CCP,” a Scalise spokesperson told PI. “It should not come as a surprise to those representing TikTok that as long as TikTok remains connected to the CCP, Congress will continue its rigorous oversight efforts to safeguard Americans from foreign threats.”
Guys, that’s not “rigorous oversight” or “safeguarding Americans.” That’s using the threats of bogus costly investigations to force companies to stop working with TikTok and helping it defend its rights under the Constitution. That seems to be a hell of a lot more like “jawboning” and a much bigger First Amendment problem than the Biden administration complaining publicly that they didn’t like how Facebook was handling COVID misinformation.
Remember, this is what the GOP Congressional folks said when they filed their amicus in the Murthy case:
Wielding threats of intervention, the executive branch of the federal government has engaged in a sustained effort to coerce private parties into censoring speech on matters of public concern. On issue after issue, the Biden Administration has distorted the free marketplace of ideas promised by the First Amendment, bringing the weight of federal authority to bear on any speech it dislikes
Isn’t that… exactly what these Congressional committees are now doing themselves? Except, much worse? Because the threats are much more direct, and the punitive nature of not obeying is even clearer and more directly tied to the speech at issue?
This sure seems to be exactly unconstitutional “jawboning.”
Whether or not you believe that there are real risks from China, it seems absolutely ridiculous that Congress is now basically following an authoritarian playbook, threatening companies for merely associating with and/or defending the rights of a company.
It undermines the principles of free speech and association, allowing governmental entities to dictate what organizations can and cannot support. This overreach of power directly chills advocacy efforts and hinders the protection of fundamental rights.
“Do you now, or have you ever, worked with TikTok to help defend its rights?”
That McCarthyism-esque question is apparently being asked by members of Congress to organizations that have been working with TikTok to defend its Constitutional rights.
Does anyone think it’s right for Congress to threaten to punish organizations from working with TikTok? Does that sound like a First Amendment violation to you? Because it sure does to me.
Over the last year or so, we’ve been hearing a lot of talk out
“Do you now, or have you ever, worked with TikTok to help defend its rights?”
That McCarthyism-esque question is apparently being asked by members of Congress to organizations that have been working with TikTok to defend its Constitutional rights.
Does anyone think it’s right for Congress to threaten to punish organizations from working with TikTok? Does that sound like a First Amendment violation to you? Because it sure does to me.
Over the last year or so, we’ve been hearing a lot of talk out of Congress on two specific issues: the supposed horrors of government officials suppressing speech and, at the same time, the supposed horrors of a successful social media app that has ties to China.
Would it surprise you to find that there are some hypocrites in Congress about all of this? Shocking, I know.
We already highlighted how a bunch of members of Congress both signed an amicus brief in the Murthy case saying that governments should never, ever, interfere with speech and also voted to ban TikTok. But, would those same members of Congress who are so worried about “jawboning” by government officials to suppress speech also then use the power of Congress to silence voices trying to defend TikTok?
Yeah, you know where this is going.
NetChoice has been the main trade group that has been defending against all the terrible laws being thrust upon the internet over the last few years. Often people dismiss NetChoice as “big tech” or “the tech industry,” but in my experience they’ve been solidly standing up for good and important internet speech policies. NetChoice has been structured to be independent of its members (i.e., they get to decide what cases they take on, not their members, which sometimes means their members dislike the causes and cases NetChoice takes on).
On Wednesday of this week, NetChoice’s membership roster looked like this:
I highlighted TikTok in particular, because on Thursday, NetChoice’s membership roster looked like this:
TikTok is missing.
Why? Well, because members of Congress threatened to investigate NetChoice if it didn’t drop TikTok from its roster. Politico had some of this story last night, claiming that there was pressure from Congress to drop TikTok:
“The Select Committee’s brazen efforts to intimidate private organizations for associating with a company with 170 million American users is a clear abuse of power that smacks of McCarthyism,” TikTok spokesperson Alex Haurek said in a statement, referring to the House China panel. “It’s a sad day when Members of Congress single out individual companies without evidence while trampling on constitutional rights and the democratic process,” Haurek added. A spokesperson for NetChoice didn’t respond to a request for comment.
The two people told Daniel that NetChoice faced pressure from the office of House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) to dump TikTok. A third person said that while no threat was made, NetChoice was told that the Select Committee on China would be investigating groups associated with TikTok and decided to sever ties as a result.
I’ve heard that the claim there was “no threat” is not accurate. As the rest of that paragraph makes clear, there was very much an implied threat that Congress would investigate organizations working with TikTok to defend its rights. I’m also hearing that others, like PR agencies and lobbying organizations that work with TikTok, are now facing similar threats from Congress.
Indeed, despite the “denial” of any threat, Politico gets the “House Select Committee on the CCP” to admit that it will launch an investigation into any organization that helps TikTok defend its rights:
“Significant bipartisan majorities in both the House and the Senate deemed TikTok a grave national security threat and the President signed a bill into law requiring them to divest from the CCP,” a Scalise spokesperson told PI. “It should not come as a surprise to those representing TikTok that as long as TikTok remains connected to the CCP, Congress will continue its rigorous oversight efforts to safeguard Americans from foreign threats.”
Guys, that’s not “rigorous oversight” or “safeguarding Americans.” That’s using the threats of bogus costly investigations to force companies to stop working with TikTok and helping it defend its rights under the Constitution. That seems to be a hell of a lot more like “jawboning” and a much bigger First Amendment problem than the Biden administration complaining publicly that they didn’t like how Facebook was handling COVID misinformation.
Remember, this is what the GOP Congressional folks said when they filed their amicus in the Murthy case:
Wielding threats of intervention, the executive branch of the federal government has engaged in a sustained effort to coerce private parties into censoring speech on matters of public concern. On issue after issue, the Biden Administration has distorted the free marketplace of ideas promised by the First Amendment, bringing the weight of federal authority to bear on any speech it dislikes
Isn’t that… exactly what these Congressional committees are now doing themselves? Except, much worse? Because the threats are much more direct, and the punitive nature of not obeying is even clearer and more directly tied to the speech at issue?
This sure seems to be exactly unconstitutional “jawboning.”
Whether or not you believe that there are real risks from China, it seems absolutely ridiculous that Congress is now basically following an authoritarian playbook, threatening companies for merely associating with and/or defending the rights of a company.
It undermines the principles of free speech and association, allowing governmental entities to dictate what organizations can and cannot support. This overreach of power directly chills advocacy efforts and hinders the protection of fundamental rights.
“Do you now, or have you ever, worked with TikTok to help defend its rights?”
That McCarthyism-esque question is apparently being asked by members of Congress to organizations that have been working with TikTok to defend its Constitutional rights.
Does anyone think it’s right for Congress to threaten to punish organizations from working with TikTok? Does that sound like a First Amendment violation to you? Because it sure does to me.
Over the last year or so, we’ve been hearing a lot of talk out
“Do you now, or have you ever, worked with TikTok to help defend its rights?”
That McCarthyism-esque question is apparently being asked by members of Congress to organizations that have been working with TikTok to defend its Constitutional rights.
Does anyone think it’s right for Congress to threaten to punish organizations from working with TikTok? Does that sound like a First Amendment violation to you? Because it sure does to me.
Over the last year or so, we’ve been hearing a lot of talk out of Congress on two specific issues: the supposed horrors of government officials suppressing speech and, at the same time, the supposed horrors of a successful social media app that has ties to China.
Would it surprise you to find that there are some hypocrites in Congress about all of this? Shocking, I know.
We already highlighted how a bunch of members of Congress both signed an amicus brief in the Murthy case saying that governments should never, ever, interfere with speech and also voted to ban TikTok. But, would those same members of Congress who are so worried about “jawboning” by government officials to suppress speech also then use the power of Congress to silence voices trying to defend TikTok?
Yeah, you know where this is going.
NetChoice has been the main trade group that has been defending against all the terrible laws being thrust upon the internet over the last few years. Often people dismiss NetChoice as “big tech” or “the tech industry,” but in my experience they’ve been solidly standing up for good and important internet speech policies. NetChoice has been structured to be independent of its members (i.e., they get to decide what cases they take on, not their members, which sometimes means their members dislike the causes and cases NetChoice takes on).
On Wednesday of this week, NetChoice’s membership roster looked like this:
I highlighted TikTok in particular, because on Thursday, NetChoice’s membership roster looked like this:
TikTok is missing.
Why? Well, because members of Congress threatened to investigate NetChoice if it didn’t drop TikTok from its roster. Politico had some of this story last night, claiming that there was pressure from Congress to drop TikTok:
“The Select Committee’s brazen efforts to intimidate private organizations for associating with a company with 170 million American users is a clear abuse of power that smacks of McCarthyism,” TikTok spokesperson Alex Haurek said in a statement, referring to the House China panel. “It’s a sad day when Members of Congress single out individual companies without evidence while trampling on constitutional rights and the democratic process,” Haurek added. A spokesperson for NetChoice didn’t respond to a request for comment.
The two people told Daniel that NetChoice faced pressure from the office of House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) to dump TikTok. A third person said that while no threat was made, NetChoice was told that the Select Committee on China would be investigating groups associated with TikTok and decided to sever ties as a result.
I’ve heard that the claim there was “no threat” is not accurate. As the rest of that paragraph makes clear, there was very much an implied threat that Congress would investigate organizations working with TikTok to defend its rights. I’m also hearing that others, like PR agencies and lobbying organizations that work with TikTok, are now facing similar threats from Congress.
Indeed, despite the “denial” of any threat, Politico gets the “House Select Committee on the CCP” to admit that it will launch an investigation into any organization that helps TikTok defend its rights:
“Significant bipartisan majorities in both the House and the Senate deemed TikTok a grave national security threat and the President signed a bill into law requiring them to divest from the CCP,” a Scalise spokesperson told PI. “It should not come as a surprise to those representing TikTok that as long as TikTok remains connected to the CCP, Congress will continue its rigorous oversight efforts to safeguard Americans from foreign threats.”
Guys, that’s not “rigorous oversight” or “safeguarding Americans.” That’s using the threats of bogus costly investigations to force companies to stop working with TikTok and helping it defend its rights under the Constitution. That seems to be a hell of a lot more like “jawboning” and a much bigger First Amendment problem than the Biden administration complaining publicly that they didn’t like how Facebook was handling COVID misinformation.
Remember, this is what the GOP Congressional folks said when they filed their amicus in the Murthy case:
Wielding threats of intervention, the executive branch of the federal government has engaged in a sustained effort to coerce private parties into censoring speech on matters of public concern. On issue after issue, the Biden Administration has distorted the free marketplace of ideas promised by the First Amendment, bringing the weight of federal authority to bear on any speech it dislikes
Isn’t that… exactly what these Congressional committees are now doing themselves? Except, much worse? Because the threats are much more direct, and the punitive nature of not obeying is even clearer and more directly tied to the speech at issue?
This sure seems to be exactly unconstitutional “jawboning.”
Whether or not you believe that there are real risks from China, it seems absolutely ridiculous that Congress is now basically following an authoritarian playbook, threatening companies for merely associating with and/or defending the rights of a company.
It undermines the principles of free speech and association, allowing governmental entities to dictate what organizations can and cannot support. This overreach of power directly chills advocacy efforts and hinders the protection of fundamental rights.
Enlarge (credit: Getty Images | Bloomberg)
The House Commerce Committee today voted 50-0 to approve a bill that would force TikTok owner ByteDance to sell the company or lose access to the US market.
The Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act "addresses the immediate national security risks posed by TikTok and establishes a framework for the Executive Branch to protect Americans from future foreign adversary controlled applications," a committ
The House Commerce Committee today voted 50-0 to approve a bill that would force TikTok owner ByteDance to sell the company or lose access to the US market.
The Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act "addresses the immediate national security risks posed by TikTok and establishes a framework for the Executive Branch to protect Americans from future foreign adversary controlled applications," a committee memo said. "If an application is determined to be operated by a company controlled by a foreign adversary—like ByteDance, Ltd., which is controlled by the People's Republic of China—the application must be divested from foreign adversary control within 180 days."
If the bill passes in the House and Senate and is signed into law by President Biden, TikTok would eventually be dropped from app stores in the US if its owner doesn't sell. It also would lose access to US-based web-hosting services.
Bangladeshi Robocop includes dance numbers. [via Marshall Julius on Twitter]
That's the headline, that's the lede, that's the entire content of this post. You're welcome.
Bonus track:
Previously: Robocop creator Ed Neumeier plans new sequel to original, ignoring the others and the reboot
The post Bangladeshi Robocop includes dance numbers appeared first on Boing Boing.
Little Monsters, rise up—Lady Gaga is coming to Fortnite. On February 20, the pop superstar-turned-actor shared a smoky, mysterious picture to X (formerly Twitter) that appears to show her Fortnite character model. The image is accompanied by one word that’s also a nod to a five-year-old meme: “*fortnite.” The post…Read more...
Little Monsters, rise up—Lady Gaga is coming to Fortnite. On February 20, the pop superstar-turned-actor shared a smoky, mysterious picture to X (formerly Twitter) that appears to show her Fortnite character model. The image is accompanied by one word that’s also a nod to a five-year-old meme: “*fortnite.” The post…
Přihlásit se
