zlacker

The framing would work just as well if we substituted for Google a certain not-exactly-friendly-with-the-U.S. regime that also happens to produce a shitload of smartphones. Whatever we don't want them to be able to do to our smartphones, we don't want Google to be able to do, either.

>>kijin+(OP)
In theory - yes, but in practice TikTok gets a lot of bashing while its American equivalents manage to get away with basically the same behavior. Meta and Google aside, Uber created Greyball to avoid regulations, they even had (still have?) a special "Ripley" button to use when facing audit, so how can we expect a foreign regime to abide by our laws if we give our own companies a free pass? And when local governments try to limit Uber's unlawful[0] actions, we threaten them with freezing our investments in other sectors? [1]

[0] https://us.boell.org/en/2019/10/17/web-partner-companies-kee...

[1] https://tvpworld.com/40781592/another-letter-from-us-ambassa...

>>kijin+(OP)
Nobody much cares about Tiktok being run by China despite years of fearmongering about it by powerful elites with the entirety of the mass media at their disposal.

Highly abstract risks just dont seem to register for most people. It was hard enough to get the masses to act in self interest over an existential risk to their health (covid).

I reckon the way to avoid maximum damage from this proposal will be some sort of inoculation - e.g. safe, trusted, easy to use tools that help people work around it. The political angle of attack is worth trying but I think it will fail.

I wish Mozilla worked that angle too - e.g. supporting lineage and microg.

>>benter+x2
I don’t think they mean TikTok. Huawei has been banned in the US for years for basically being permanently backdoored hardware for the Chinese government. The precedent, history, and motivations are clear. American companies trying to avoid regulation is scummy, but it’s basically the exact opposite of acting as an corporate extension of the government.