finitebanjo comments on US can’t ban TikTok for security reasons while ignoring Temu, other apps, TikTok argues

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago (5 children)

And the subsidiary has explicit permission to continue operating if the parent company divests.

parent

[+] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world -6 points 2 years ago (4 children)

But explicit prohibition on continued operation if they don't. ByteDance is not affected outside of the US. Only US employees are being threatened.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

ByteDance employees chose to work for a Chinese PsyOp parent company who refuses to sell ByteDance. If anything, those employees are suffering because the CCP were given too many rights and protections for owning a business in the USA.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world -4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

So you're agreeing this is a Bill of Attainder limited to a single group of American citizens?

Thanks.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

The single group of American Citizens are facing no repercussions from the US Government. They're being thrown under the bus by the Chinese.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

[–] YeetPics@mander.xyz 2 points 2 years ago

Only US employees are being threatened.

Lmao, that's quite the stretch. The way I see it, US employees AND citizens would be protected from foreign spyware.

if the XI's China could stop trying to interfere with the world beyond its border they could also probably stop themselves from being targeted by legislature aimed at protecting citizens of countries outside China.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent