I’m not here to claim that Tiktok is completely harmless, or that it’s even a good site. I’m sure they absolutely do collect as much personal information as they can, and I’m sure they give it to the Chinese government whenever they ask. But I don’t understand how Meta and Facebook are meant to be any better? There’s always a lot of hoo-haa going on with politicians promising to ban tiktok, and (at least back on Reddit) everybody’s vowing they will never use tiktok because it’s such a privacy invasive site. Yet I never see anybody going up against Facebook, at least the average person, but they collect just as much personal info and I’m sure hand it over whenever any government agency in the US asks them to
It kind of feels to me like this is some sort of country thing. China is bad, so they shouldn’t have your personal info. But the US is the last bastion of free speech and privacy, so their companies would NEVER dare to invade your privacy, and their government would never abuse their power to get people’s personal info
I’m aware Lemmy probably isn’t the best place to ask since most people here seem to be deep into open source software and often privacy focused (so I suppose wouldn’t use either) but this also feels like the only place on the internet I might actually get an answer that isn’t just “TIKTOK BAD”. If you refuse to use tiktok but are ok with Facebook - why?
They are both malware and I wish we could snap them out of existence thanos style.
“Facebook is fine” Ima stop you right there, lol
Are you referring to privacy or security? In my opinion, they’re both absolute dumpster dogshit for privacy AND security. But facebook (meta) is a US company whereas tik tok is a Chinese company. So tik tok is seen as a security risk because China is an adversary to the west. An adversary is more likely to spy through their product than a friendly nation. So tik tok is seen as a security threat by many in the west. That’s basically all there is to it.
American Exceptionalism
That is it.
That is literally it.
Ugh please add /s so people take it as it is
Facebook is certainly not fine, it’s just talked about less, especially among the younger generations. Teens and twenty-something’s haven’t been drawn to Facebook for quite some time, while TikTok is currently the place to be if you’re in that age range. You don’t need to convince a Zoomer to avoid Facebook, because Facebook is where their grandma does social media, but TikTok is currently dominating their attention.
Facebook is most definitely not fine. However, as far as I know Facebook hasn’t pushed known RCE (remote code execution) exploits into their product updates, which TikTok has. Politicians don’t care about this but literally everyone else should.
Got any source for that TikTok RCE exploit? All I could find was a single bug 3 years ago.
At this point it’s possible that it’s been fixed. I remember hearing about it a couple years ago, in the context of the bug, but I also remember hearing about how a component of their updater, when the app was broken down and deobfuscated, would just run whatever remote code package was handed to it without alerting the end user.
Even if the RCE has been fixed or removed though, the rest of their security theater is unreasonably bad, and I don’t trust them near enough to ever install their app.
Facebook isn’t fine. But TikTok is worse because it’s not fully controlled within our borders.
Since I don’t live in neither country Id be spied by both countries. Just like most of 6b people in the world.
Fuck them both.
Xenophobia mostly. Facebook is not fine. Neither is google. None of it is.
All your data in those major providers gets vacuumed up directly by the NSA.
Yeah what made me so racist against the Chinese was reading about tiananmen square. Being cautious about an authoritarian government is definitely being a horrible bigot! /s
Who said Facebook is fine ? Threads was illegal in the EU due to privacy concern.
Facebook is NOT FINE
Tiktok is Chinese and Facebook is American… That’s why they are saying tiktok is bad… Facebook is probably worse by a considerable degree.
Because CHINA BAD even though they are an ocean apart from you and can’t jail you like your own government.
America is not even my country, so yeah, bad and bad, as both are not companies from my country. (and even companies from here would be bad, my data, hands off)
to boil it down; “only our government gets to spy on us”
That’s because all those boomers don’t use TikTok so it’s easy for them to say that “it’s bad and privacy invading”. However, when you have to accept that the platform you rely on so much is bad, it’s not so easy to say “it’s bad and privacy invading”.
WTF would you rely on tiktok/facebook for something (or anything)?
I rely on my phone to be able to call somebody (or emergency services) when I need to, I rely on my transport to get me where I need to go and I rely on the grocery stores to provide food (alas, garden is not ig enough to grow it myself)
Anything on internet is optional, very entertaining and fun, but optional.
TIL people born before 1985 are all boomers
Nop, Wikipedia shows that the term is dependent on the country and/orregion woth for the US being the '40-'50 the period, most ending tha boomer period before the '70s and fance being the only one as late as '73 to end that period.
That it’s highly misused by the last generations as they don’t understand the earlier ones. It would be just as bad to call everybody born after '65 milennial.
Yes I understand all this. I was being sarcastic
Tiktok is bad because it’s Chineese, Facebook is ‘good’ because it’s American.
Alas, that’s all.
I used Facebook because everybody I know uses it. My wife and me are the 1st to delete that account, as we hate the constant tracking of Facebook. Alas, Google is even worse, but as Android user we’re linked to that. I’m trying to minimize contact there as well, but it’s hard with purchased apps and content.
For some strange reason having your own country or ‘friendly’ countries and their companies track you is ‘good’ and when less friendly countries or their companies do that it’s ‘bad’. When somewhat privacy minded, all tracking is bad.
When someone tels me they have nothing to hide, I’ll ask if they would like a camera in their bathroom or bedroom, as they have nothing to hide. All say that’s an unfair comparison, but it shows that there is nobody that has nothing they waht to keep private.
For me, US companies are even worse then the Chineese ones, as US companies will try to enforce US law and morals upon it’s users. (But I don’t trust either)
For the most part, I 90% agree with your stance. However, you can’t take the statement “I have nothing to hide” literally to the extremes. That would be suggesting that the person is okay giving you the passwords for their bank accounts under the guide that they have nothing to hide.
It’s a common colloquial expression which expresses how one accepts the situation as is. I’ve got nothing to hide doesn’t mean that I then consent to a strip search or house search, those are uncomfortable and inconvenient. You can’t always apply the same single justification to support multiple separate events, because you need the full context. Imagine “can I borrow a dollar? sure thing, you’re my friend” Well whoops, you’ve now just given your friend complete reign over all your money for as long as the friend title exists
A more accurate interpretation here is “They’re not collecting any information that I’m embarrassed about”
Sorry, language is messy and oftentimes there are differences between literal and intended meaning. I just wanted to point out why it is indeed, an unfair comparison. You can achieve your point without attacking someone’s (as I argue) correct statement when taken in context, since your underlying point still stands that the majority of people have some limit of sharing information that they would not be comfortable with.
For the most part, I 90% agree with your stance. However, you can’t take the statement “I have nothing to hide” literally to the extremes. That would be suggesting that the person is okay giving you the passwords for their bank accounts under the guide that they have nothing to hide.
Nop . that’s not what I meant. What I indicate with the camera in the bathroom is, would you trust the government to be able to watch to keep you safe and do a perfect job at keeping your data safe? Over here (Netherlands) it’s even illegal for the government to fit camera’s on spots where they can look into houses. (those video doorbells are illegal as well and a pest)
To use your anology, would you be at ease when your banking website is forced to use http instead of https because https is encryption and encryption is bad, so not allowed by your government. When you use encryption, you have something to hide (your banking password) and thus are a criminal. Would you accept that situation, knowing that either de government can collect all your data or a company or even worse, criminals?
A more accurate interpretation here is “They’re not collecting any information that I’m embarrassed about”
When they collect ‘all data’, there is bound to be something you wouldn’t want to share freely, say your banking password. (amongst others). People always have something to hide, even as simple as being in the street while picking your nose when a google maps car drives by (let alone kicing that nice neighbour while married).
Knowing that government/companies/criminals can take/gather information from/about you without telling you exactly what they do with it (even when you trust them enough to keep to their words) is bad.
When I ask you for your banking password it’s your choice to either give it to me as you trust me (bad choice, but your choice). When companies entise you to give them access to all information they can gather (including your banking password) and then dowith it as they like takes away the choice.
Sorry, language is messy and oftentimes there are differences between literal and intended meaning. I just wanted to point out why it is indeed, an unfair comparison. You can achieve your point without attacking someone’s (as I argue) correct statement when taken in context, since your underlying point still stands that the majority of people have some limit of sharing information that they would not be comfortable with.
Yep, language is messy (especially when the language used is not your main language), but I use the literal meaning to point out that everybody has something to hide. How they look underneath clothes is for most a pretty private detail they share with a limited group of people. Giving a company/government access to those details are generally accepted as bad, but most don’t see data gathering as taking away privacy rights, as long as it’s ‘for a good cause’. Privacy should never be taken away from everybody because ‘the cause is good’ or given away easily (and no, neither tiktok or facebook are a good cause).
Everybody has something to hide, so it’s everybody has the right for privacy. That right can be revoked under very specific curcomstances, but only when there is enough cause to suspect criminal behaviour.
