Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

roflmaolz t1_je5t7ns wrote

Reply to comment by spectre1210 in US hands China easy PR win with TikTok show by HorrorCharacter5127

https://www.newsweek.com/does-tiktok-ban-allow-20-year-prison-sentence-1790932

Here is that Twitter source for you!

Btw I'm American and personally don't want to see another Patriot act in my lifetime.

4

spectre1210 t1_je5to6n wrote

Oh thanks! Did you read the actual article, or just the headline?

Here, I'll help you out:

> "Under the terms of the bill, someone must be engaged in 'sabotage or subversion' of communications technology in the U.S., causing 'catastrophic effects' on U.S. critical infrastructure, or 'interfering in, or altering the result' of a federal election in order for criminal penalties to apply," Warner's communications director, Rachel Cohen, said.

Lol OK, you're an American. So am I. Saying Patriot Act isn't going to be enough for me to disregard my entire point. I agree the language in this bill is a bit non-specific (often how legislation is crafted) and could be refined, but anyone claiming they won't be able to use a VPN in the next few months is being bombastic at best.

−1

roflmaolz t1_je6s9zu wrote

Right, just like how the Patriot act was supposed to be just for anti terrorism and all of a sudden, NSA is wiretapping and gathering data on regular Americans.

That's the problem that you don't seem to understand. This vague and broad wording is giving unelected officials broad and sweeping powers to do so much all in the name of "national security", just like the Patriot act. You have to be really naive to think the government won't abuse this power and stretch the wording to do as much as they want.

1

spectre1210 t1_je75axn wrote

The failing of the Patriot Act is the act itself, or a failure to enforce it as was intended? I'd certainly argue the original intent of that bill was justified in its own right, as is the RESTRICT Act considering TikTok's proximity to the Chinese government. We've also ceased use of Huawei chips in federal devices for similar reasons, so it's not exactly like this is an immediate reaction over a singular event. But if you're genuinely concerned about surveillance and manipulation of regular citizens, just you wait until you learn about how China operates - at least one reason to put in the "pro" list of the RESTRICT Act.

So you see, the problem is that you don't seem to understand. In fact, it seems like all you want to do is compare this to the Patriot Act, and label anyone as naive who disagrees with you.

Amusingly, I think you're naive for failing to see the differences in these circumstances, rather than fixating on the similarities.

0