Yes, and I’ve read most of it. It’s not nearly as bad as the Patriot Act.
I’m absolutely against this ban on first amendment grounds, but it’s not nearly as bad as the Patriot Act was and still is (it has changed names, but it’s pretty similar to how it was when passed).
Most of it? It’s 2 pages long. It’s not like you need much length with such sweeping provisions, though.
The Patriot Act isn’t under a different name right now, instead the provisions were legalized through judicial precedence before it was allowed to expire. I guess that’s quite a small nitpick in the end (other than not being able to repeal it).
Yes, the bill isn’t that long, but I kind of skimmed parts.
The Patriot Act was reauthorized several times, and it eventually expired, but it’s still effectively enforced by permanent provisions as well as other bills passed since then.
Regardless, equating this bill and the Patriot Act is nonsensical. This bill allows the government to ban apps and services from adversary countries. It doesn’t authorize data collection on citizens or any of the other nonsense we got from the Patriot Act, it merely allows the government to block certain apps and services from US markets. It’s hardly the same thing.
That’s at least as hyperbolic as calling it the Patriot Act 2.0.
It doesn’t authorize data collection on citizens or any of the other nonsense we got from the Patriot Act
No need. It’s already legal. This bill builds on top of that foundation in a very meaningful way.
it merely allows the government to block certain apps and services from US markets
And the reason for this is evident based on the choice given to TikTok - allow the US access to all users data (preferably exclusively the US) through methods up to and including selling foreign stakes in the company. The world is capitalist and being closed out of US markets is an impossible handicap to play with. No one will invest because there is a severe limit to growth. This only leads to one outcome: Centralization of data through the US, or the business will be replaced with one that does.
Yes, and I’ve read most of it. It’s not nearly as bad as the Patriot Act.
I’m absolutely against this ban on first amendment grounds, but it’s not nearly as bad as the Patriot Act was and still is (it has changed names, but it’s pretty similar to how it was when passed).
Most of it? It’s 2 pages long. It’s not like you need much length with such sweeping provisions, though.
The Patriot Act isn’t under a different name right now, instead the provisions were legalized through judicial precedence before it was allowed to expire. I guess that’s quite a small nitpick in the end (other than not being able to repeal it).
Yes, the bill isn’t that long, but I kind of skimmed parts.
The Patriot Act was reauthorized several times, and it eventually expired, but it’s still effectively enforced by permanent provisions as well as other bills passed since then.
Regardless, equating this bill and the Patriot Act is nonsensical. This bill allows the government to ban apps and services from adversary countries. It doesn’t authorize data collection on citizens or any of the other nonsense we got from the Patriot Act, it merely allows the government to block certain apps and services from US markets. It’s hardly the same thing.
That’s at least as hyperbolic as calling it the Patriot Act 2.0.
No need. It’s already legal. This bill builds on top of that foundation in a very meaningful way.
And the reason for this is evident based on the choice given to TikTok - allow the US access to all users data (preferably exclusively the US) through methods up to and including selling foreign stakes in the company. The world is capitalist and being closed out of US markets is an impossible handicap to play with. No one will invest because there is a severe limit to growth. This only leads to one outcome: Centralization of data through the US, or the business will be replaced with one that does.