• GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    … it’s obvious because a domestic entity is subject to local laws, and can if push comes to shove be shut down or nationalized. A foreign one is essentially out of reach.

    • brain_in_a_box@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      Lol, yeah. The American government definitely always follows the law…

      Also lol at the idea that the US government would shut down or nationalise a domestic big tech company for spying on its customers.

      • GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        9 months ago

        Why is it contentious that a government can better curb foreign interference if it is done on a domestic platform? Regardless of how shitty the United States are that’s a simple fact and also practiced by China, only to a much greater extent.

        • brain_in_a_box@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          better curb foreign interference

          Wtf. We were talking about domestic bad actors, and now you’re going off any foreign influence?

          only to a much greater extent.

          If this is a “simple fact” I presume should easily be able to prove it, and aren’t just basing it off general xenophobia.

          • GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            9 months ago

            I have no horse in the race, I’m not an American. I don’t know or really care to what extent the corrupt shithole that is America can control its own corporations due to regulatory capture. That’s your own problem to fix.

            All I’m arguing is that from the perspective of the us government it makes perfect sense to be wary of foreign influence before its own corps.

            Didn’t tiktok just accidentally prove the American legislator’s argument by causing mass calls into the legislators office or something? Endless amounts of people who don’t even know why they are calling, just because “tiktok said so”. Are you telling me that isn’t a disturbing implication?

    • saga@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      The existence of the article you’re literally commenting on directly refutes what you’re saying here. Like you’re in a thread because of news that demonstrates that the opposite of what you’re saying here is actually true.

      If you need more examples - What happened to Facebook after the Cambridge Analytica scandal? They got banned by congress right? They got shut down? The government stopped them from continuing to manipulate the public?