This is not about us vs them. No apps from Australia, Europe or Africa are on the list of banned apps. Its China where in order to do business there, you have to give the government access to your trade secrets and full server access without a warrant.
While its possible for any company to succumb to government pressure for unreasonable access, it is a prerequisite to do so in China. The world knows this.
Hong Kong's new national security law is plenty proof that China is not a genuine partner and is a bad faith actor. Your right to look at TikTok videos does not trump anyone else's right for security.
GDPR wouldn't block Tik Tok's data extraction practices, nor is it effective legislation at all.
GDPR is simply EU tech protectionism, nothing more. All it gave consumers was infuriating cookie nag screens.
GDPR utterly failed to prevent data brokers from operating with impunity in Germany and other EU nations. Your cell phone location data is still openly sold when you live in the EU. It's useless.
As far as I understand it, GDPR is personal privacy. I believe the US concern is one of national security.
It has already been established that social media has problems with national security when the company is owned by US. It is likely to be more problematic if it is owned by a country that continues to undermine us with espionage and Cold War tactics.
I think protecting our national security is not authoritarianism.
This is not about us vs them. No apps from Australia, Europe or Africa are on the list of banned apps. Its China where in order to do business there, you have to give the government access to your trade secrets and full server access without a warrant.
While its possible for any company to succumb to government pressure for unreasonable access, it is a prerequisite to do so in China. The world knows this.
Hong Kong's new national security law is plenty proof that China is not a genuine partner and is a bad faith actor. Your right to look at TikTok videos does not trump anyone else's right for security.