Imogen
Here is my personal take on the TikTok drama.
1. The app and service is trash.
2. I personally think it should be banned along with Facebook, Snapchat, Twitter, Reddit and Instagram because it’s only purpose is to harvest data.
3. Any law banning TikTok will most likely be struck down as unconstitutional.
4. A better approach would be creating laws codifying the right to privacy, data retention, data destruction and banning the sale of data from these services. No exceptions.
🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱
So you think we should do unconstitutional things like ban tik tok? I agree with point 4 that would be a better approach but point 2 worries me considering you admit to point 3.
🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱
Thats how i understood it. That is why it is so worrying, what you **want** is for it to be banned in violation of the rights and freedoms given by the constitution. You recognize it would violate the constitution yet still want it. That is what is so concerning.
Imogen
It’s opinion piece written from my perspective. What I want and what the law or life will allow don’t always line up.
For example I would love to make a million dollars a year but that’s not going to happen or I want a 140 foot tower in my backyard but the yard isn’t big enough.
🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱
No i got that, its concerning that you think someone who wishes to consent to giving up their data but simply is foolish and doesnt know what is best for them is a good justification for denying free speech is exactly what concerns me.
To be fair we arent that misaligned. I do think that pervasive social networks should be treated as public space and their ability to censor curtailed. But I would not ban the medium or any forum beyond enforcing limitations on them.
Imogen
I wouldn’t ban it because of the speech component I would ban it because it harvesting data from children who are unable to consent to any other contract in our society and have no understanding of the negative consequences of letting this data be harvested.
The two issues are legally distinct.
🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱
Agreed, but they didnt, nor do i think they should have. Simply being a service on the internet should not qualify you as a common carrier. I do think prolific social media services which do not inter-operate opening with other third-party services however should be classified as common carriers.
Imogen
With regard to censorship, had congress classified them (The internet industry collectively) as common carriers in 1996 the censorship issue wouldn’t be a concern.
GNU social JP is a social network, courtesy of GNU social JP管理人. It runs on GNU social, version 2.0.2-dev, available under the GNU Affero General Public License.
All GNU social JP content and data are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.