logoalt Hacker News

firesteelrain • yesterday at 7:32 PM • 2 replies • view on HN

There was evidence and it was discussed in the ruling by the Supreme Court. Please read it.

For example, https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24-656_ca7d.pdf

Gorsuch pg 3

Replies

tveita • today at 12:33 AM

Assuming you mean this:

  According to the Federal Bureau
  of Investigation, TikTok can access “any data” stored in a
  consenting user’s “contact list”—including names, photos,
  and other personal information about unconsenting third
  parties. Ibid. (emphasis added). And because the record
  shows that the People’s Republic of China (PRC) can require TikTok’s parent company “to cooperate with [its] efforts to obtain personal data,” there 
  is little to stop all that
  information from ending up in the hands of a designated
  foreign adversary. Id., at 696; see id., at 673–676; ante, at
  3. The PRC may then use that information to “build dossiers . . . for blackmail,” “conduct corporate espionage,” or advance intelligence operations.
It basically just says that the app asks for the user's contact list, and that if the user grants it, the phone OS overshares information. That's really thin as evidence of wrong-doing. It doesn't even say that this capability is currently coded into the app. This sounds more like an Android/iOS problem - why is the contact sharing all or nothing? Would the ban still be OK if the app didn't have read contact permissions?
➕ show 2 replies
gunian • yesterday at 8:16 PM

Can you link it here would be super grateful

It's super interesting to see the custom code in TikTok not in Reels that can enable this not into politics but the algo would be cool to look at

➕ show 1 reply