No I’m saying regardless of your opinion, you shouldn’t have an opinion based on the source of the statement is what I’m saying. Yes MBS is trash, but I would still listen to what he has to say.

So you think giving people freedoms to drink and go to bars is a bad thing?

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/saudi-arabia-opens-first-liquor-store-rcna135597

And yes I’m fully aware of Khashoggi. What I’m saying is all people all governments have good and bad. I can easily agree with many things that awful people do. It doesn’t make them any less awful, but I’m not so ignorant to be opposed to something just because an awful person says it.

So to hate a good idea just because of it’s messenger is ignorant at best and harmful at worst.

The reason I bring this up is because in USA it’s becoming more and more like this. That regardless of what the policy is, the only thing the stupid politicians care about now is who the messenger is. And it’s doing incredible damage to the country.

Now, obviously you’re just making a statement. I don’t really disagree with it as I think MBS is a horrible human being. But I really don’t like the idea of agreeing or disagreeing with someone based on the person saying it.

I don’t know why this isn’t talked about more, but the reason for the disconnect is that USA has become a petrostate. As a petrostate, the rich get wildly rich and makes the economy look good, while the citizens are fed a bunch of religion to keep them from protesting.

It’s good that you point that out. Because it shows US really can’t sanction China and only entities within it like it does to its own allies as opposed to straight country sanctions like Iran and North Korea.

https://www.tradecompliance.pitt.edu/embargoed-and-sanctioned-countries

Here’s a list.

In fairness though, that list also shows the US can’t sanction Russia either. So not sure how much of a flex not being able to sanction China is.

Yes, they can’t operate the website in USA so they’ll operate it in Canada and Mexico. And yes, that’s why they’re targeting the stores and not the site, because the only thing they can do is prevent operations inside the country but they cannot block access to it.

Finally, of course technically Apple could only allow EU to do this, but much like their transition to USB-C it would be weird if they did that. ESPECIALLY since having Tik Tok on their phones would be a benefit to them, not a negative.

*Edit: Also I was defining free speech in my initial post, which you seem to agree with. I was not trying to define this abhorrent loophole of a bill that bans but doesn’t ban because of 1A Tik Tok. And if you don’t understand why the government trying to loophole out of the constitution is bad, well I have no words.

Actually that’s not correct. Media isn’t like other products, it’s protected speech. This is why even though we’ve sanctioned Russia, you can still go and read Russian Times. Even foreign media, which Tik Tok is, would be protected under our free speech laws.

This is why this “ban” isn’t a ban, which the senators keep repeating. It doesn’t block Tik Tok or it’s website from being used by Americans. All it does is block Tik Tok from being distributed by American app stores. So if they don’t divest, you could still go to their website and download their app. With the new EU ruling, Apple is going to have to allow third party installation anyway, so you’ll still be able to use Tik Tok as if nothing happened.

So what’s all this really about? Propaganda and showmanship. They’re just pushing a China bad narrative as realistically our 1A laws prevent them from doing anything actually effective here.

That’s an excellent question because people completely misunderstand freedom of speech. The law is freedom of speech from government persecution. Which is literally what banning Tik Tok is. It’s the government persecuting a company for being Chinese.

What the law does not protect is private persecution. If you come to my house and announce you’re a pedo, I can kick you out of my house for that. Just like tik tok can ban you.

They’re already doing that. That’s why the spending bill is being rolled up into one. That way they can say they’re voting for it to stop the Russian genocide and so what if it does a little genocide in the Middle East.

Sadly, your joke is just reality

Uh, if what your saying is true, that sounds like an absolute victory for Spez. He never wanted good communities, he wanted communities he could market to. Having the idiot right wing that buys Chinese hats that says MAGA is absolutely the audience he wants.

In fact, if you’re all correct and the old social media is just straight going to the right wing and the left wing goes underground to techie sites like Lemmy, their voices will get magnified. Which is already happening with bud and Starbucks. Oh we are fucked…