[nsoonhui]

I don't think this has much to do with export control-- note that Manus, as impressive as it is, is still a wrapper around fundamental western models--, rather it has more to do with capital controls.

China has been trying to stop large scale outflow of businesses and individuals for quite some time, due to local politics concern. What Manus was doing, achieving successes first in China then setup a nominal shell company in Singapore, seems like a textbook case of flight (润）, which China is trying to prevent.

[bluegatty]

This is a good answer. The export controls have a strategic purpose - and Manus fits squarely within the spirit of the controls and maybe not the technicality of the rules.

Consider that if this were a much smaller project, they'd run afoul of the same technicalities but would they be sanctioned? Probably not.

It's very fair to make comparisons as to the arbitrary application of these rules in various regimes, lord knows 'TikTok' has been treated like a Pinata, but still, it'd be naive to think that this is about 'some rule'. It's about the 'Grand Game'.

Should note: the 'nominal shell' stuff I think is fair game for all nations to be scrutinizing. All of this 'Caribbean Island Incorporation' I think violates 'the spirit' of commercial laws and practices anyhow. It'd be one thing if Manus was 'really' a Singapore company but that it's truly just 'some paperwork' gives legitimacy to the 'onshore rules' being applied.

[xbmcuser]

Tiktok was about only one thing and that was Israel losing the narrative war as unlike most of western social media which was deranking and censoring showing of Israeli atrocities to the world Tiktok was not.

[bluegatty]

That was the straw that broke the camels back but it was always a big concern.

[mensetmanusman]

Anyone who says it’s about one thing is probably under-informed, we also saw how tiktok was pressured into showing people different realities in Russia and Ukraine.

[ethbr1]

TikTok was about capital realizing that feed algorithms are cheaper and more subtle to buy than advertising or a newspaper.

Same reason Elon bought Twitter.

Money is money, but convincing people is power.

[HappyPanacea]

No, there were efforts to ban TikTok well before Oct 7th 2023 in 2020-2021 by the first Trump Admin, and there was ongoing effort in 2022-2023 during Biden Admin.

TikTok Agrees to Sell U.s. Operations, https://www.tiktok.com/en/trending/detail/tiktok-agrees-to-s... , 25 Dec 2022

Biden approves banning TikTok from federal government phones, https://www.npr.org/2022/12/20/1144519602/congress-is-about-... , 20 Dec 2022

U.S. is 'looking at' banning TikTok and Chinese social media apps, Pompeo says, https://www.cnbc.com/2020/07/07/us-looking-at-banning-tiktok... , 7 July 2020

[NoGravitas]

There were National Security ghouls pushing a TikTok ban as far back as 2020 because of the "China bad" angle, but it didn't really become a widespread and bipartisan concern until after the latest round of massacres amped up in Gaza and USAians started seeing atrocities on TikTok.

[bluegatty]

China is bad. It's a hyper authoritarian state using information collected from accounts for nefarious purposes, including informing their influence campaigns, targeting and they were censoring for specific issues.

It's unthinkable that any free nation would allow a fairly oppressive and powerful entity to have that kind of power.

China had (has) it's own police force in Canada, monitoring ex-pats and students, and very actively monitors nationals and ex-nationals, they us research funding to leverage acquiescence on those kinds of things on campus etc..

Media, Finance and other 'core industries' are protected everywhere, the only place it's less visible is the US, because they haven't needed to - the nation is huge relative to it's peers.

Instead of being TikTok specific, most nations should have foreign surveillance rules and they should be applied much more severely to the extent that those nations are authoritarian / totalitarian etc..

China should not be allowed to own any media entities in the West, full stop.

Most nations should definitely ban US Social Media companies from hosting certain kinds of data, have some domiciling rules that protect form CLOUD act etc..

All of that proportional to the risk and general concerns; obviously the US represents a risk vector of greater proportion than in 2008, so rules need to adjust.

[krainboltgreene]

> It's a hyper authoritarian state using information collected from accounts for nefarious purposes, including informing their influence campaigns, targeting and they were censoring for specific issues.

As an american, I'm already used to that from my own government.

[NoGravitas]

As I said, National Security ghouls.

[xbmcuser]

Are you gaslighting Israel has been committing a genocide long before Oct 7th. Reactions of people after the shock of Oct 7th wore off made Israel to actually do something about tiktok using its Israel lobby. The only one that can get both US parties do what it wants without much debate

[culi]

China is citing national security as AI is becoming a key industry. It's no different from all the times the US intervened to stop China from buying out US companies. E.g.

https://hvmilner.scholar.princeton.edu/sites/g/files/toruqf2...

> President Trump issued an order blocking the $1.3 billion sale of a Portland, Ore.-based company called Lattice Semiconductor to private equity firm Canyon Bridge Capital Partners. The stated rationale for Trump’s order was national security.