The Nonlinear Library LW - On the Latest TikTok Bill by Zvi
Mar 13, 2024
46:11
Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: On the Latest TikTok Bill, published by Zvi on March 13, 2024 on LessWrong.
TikTok Might Get Banned Soon
This attempt is getting reasonably far rather quickly, passing the House with broad support.
Alec Stapp: TikTok bill to remove influence of CCP:
passed unanimously out of committee
GOP leadership says they'll bring it to the floor for a vote next week
Biden says he'll sign the bill if passed
Can't believe it's taken this long, but should be done soon.
It's been obvious for years that we shouldn't let China control a black-box algorithm that influences >100 million American users.
JSM: Can this stand up to court scrutiny though?
Alec Stapp: Yes.
It then passed the house 352-65, despite opposition from Donald Trump.
Manifold is as of now around 72% that a bill will pass, similar to Metaculus. Consensus is that it is unlikely that ByteDance will divest. They will fight in court, and if they lose they likely are not bluffing about letting TikTok be shut down or banned in America, Metaculus only has a 12% chance they will sell this year.
The bill now goes on to the Senate. I see about a 43% chance it passes there within the month, and a 71% chance it will happen this year. Those numbers seem reasonable to me.
The main purpose of this post is to go over arguments for and against the bill, and also what the bill actually would and would not do.
I have long been in favor on principle of banning or forcing divestiture of TikTok. Then I saw the Restrict Act, and that was clearly a no-good, very-bad bill.
My view of the current bill, after a close reading, is that it is vastly better, and about as good as we could reasonably expect. It seems positive and I hope it passes, whether or not ByteDance folds and agrees to divest. I expect it to pass constitutional muster, although one cannot be sure.
To make them easy to find:
Here is Noah Smith's case for banning TikTok.
Here is Matthew Yglesias's case for banning TikTok.
This is a profile of Make Gallagher, who is leading the charge to pass the bill.
I go over various arguments for and against the bill, and for and against forcing divestiture of or banning TikTok in general, as well, as well as other related developments. The good argument against the bill is the libertarian concern about expansion of government powers, and what else the government might do. I do not believe it should carry the day on this bill, but I definitely get why one might think so.
Execution is Everything
I continue to strongly be in favor, in principle, of banning or forcing divestiture of TikTok, if we could do exactly that and only that, without otherwise attacking free speech and free enterprise or expanding the power of the state.
TikTok continues to be Chinese spyware. It also continues to be an increasing point of vulnerability for China to put its thumb on American culture, politics and opinion.
It continues to promote unhealthy patterns of use. Many want to quit, or know they would be better off without it, or at least would take very little money to quit despite spending tons of time on the app, but feel locked in by a combination of a Skinner box and social dynamics of everyone else being there.
All the dynamics around this round of the fight make me more confident that it is important to get this done.
So yes, if there was a clean way to get rid of it or force divestiture, great.
However, as I said a year ago in Given the Restrict Act, Don't Ban TikTok, the proposed S 686 or the Restrict Act would have vastly expanded government powers over the internet, a cure far worse than the disease.
So for me, ultimately, it comes down to the bill. Is it a good bill, or a bad bill? More precisely, is this a bill we can live with?
Daniel Lippman (Politico): "They're trying to use these scare tactics to have a bill that gives the government unprecedented ...
TikTok Might Get Banned Soon
This attempt is getting reasonably far rather quickly, passing the House with broad support.
Alec Stapp: TikTok bill to remove influence of CCP:
passed unanimously out of committee
GOP leadership says they'll bring it to the floor for a vote next week
Biden says he'll sign the bill if passed
Can't believe it's taken this long, but should be done soon.
It's been obvious for years that we shouldn't let China control a black-box algorithm that influences >100 million American users.
JSM: Can this stand up to court scrutiny though?
Alec Stapp: Yes.
It then passed the house 352-65, despite opposition from Donald Trump.
Manifold is as of now around 72% that a bill will pass, similar to Metaculus. Consensus is that it is unlikely that ByteDance will divest. They will fight in court, and if they lose they likely are not bluffing about letting TikTok be shut down or banned in America, Metaculus only has a 12% chance they will sell this year.
The bill now goes on to the Senate. I see about a 43% chance it passes there within the month, and a 71% chance it will happen this year. Those numbers seem reasonable to me.
The main purpose of this post is to go over arguments for and against the bill, and also what the bill actually would and would not do.
I have long been in favor on principle of banning or forcing divestiture of TikTok. Then I saw the Restrict Act, and that was clearly a no-good, very-bad bill.
My view of the current bill, after a close reading, is that it is vastly better, and about as good as we could reasonably expect. It seems positive and I hope it passes, whether or not ByteDance folds and agrees to divest. I expect it to pass constitutional muster, although one cannot be sure.
To make them easy to find:
Here is Noah Smith's case for banning TikTok.
Here is Matthew Yglesias's case for banning TikTok.
This is a profile of Make Gallagher, who is leading the charge to pass the bill.
I go over various arguments for and against the bill, and for and against forcing divestiture of or banning TikTok in general, as well, as well as other related developments. The good argument against the bill is the libertarian concern about expansion of government powers, and what else the government might do. I do not believe it should carry the day on this bill, but I definitely get why one might think so.
Execution is Everything
I continue to strongly be in favor, in principle, of banning or forcing divestiture of TikTok, if we could do exactly that and only that, without otherwise attacking free speech and free enterprise or expanding the power of the state.
TikTok continues to be Chinese spyware. It also continues to be an increasing point of vulnerability for China to put its thumb on American culture, politics and opinion.
It continues to promote unhealthy patterns of use. Many want to quit, or know they would be better off without it, or at least would take very little money to quit despite spending tons of time on the app, but feel locked in by a combination of a Skinner box and social dynamics of everyone else being there.
All the dynamics around this round of the fight make me more confident that it is important to get this done.
So yes, if there was a clean way to get rid of it or force divestiture, great.
However, as I said a year ago in Given the Restrict Act, Don't Ban TikTok, the proposed S 686 or the Restrict Act would have vastly expanded government powers over the internet, a cure far worse than the disease.
So for me, ultimately, it comes down to the bill. Is it a good bill, or a bad bill? More precisely, is this a bill we can live with?
Daniel Lippman (Politico): "They're trying to use these scare tactics to have a bill that gives the government unprecedented ...