Gotta keep in mind this is a ban on 'state devices and networks.'
If you're using your own phone with your service, you should be fine.
Don't know why people are trying to use TikTok on government devices, anyways. Lazy bastards.
Gotta keep in mind this is a ban on ‘state devices and networks.’
Yea in this case I think it's entirely reasonable. I don't think any (Ad)Tech software should be allowed on state devices or networks. It's a security concern whether it's a company in the USA or a foreign company gathering every ounce of data it can hoover up.
They are blocking schools from accessing it, preventing serious studies of the platform from taking places and restricting the progress that colleges in Texas can make, driving potential communication students out of the state.
If it did not apply to institutes of education it may be a good idea, but as is its just more culture war
Time wasting sites like YouTube or TikTok have been blocked in schools for as long as I can remember.
This isn't about blocking high schoolers from being distracted it's about blocking the institutes of learning from being able to properly study and expose how these sites are manufactured to waste time.
Good point. And it's not just time wasting, it goes against the point of being in school for education. These apps ruin attention span, erode critical thinking skills, turn beliefs into a popularity contest, contribute to bullying, destroy self-confidence and self-worth, peddle conspiracy theories, and waste time.
Edit: I want to add that I don't personally think it should be blocked in colleges. My reasons above apply to younger students; not that I don't think the app still poses risks to older students in college, but they are permitted to take the risks they wish to take. I do understand the security justification, and if that is the purported reasoning, I think it's acceptable. In reality, the security angle plus it only being TikTok being targeted is just playing on Sinophobia. If they were serious about it being a security threat, they'd not stop at TikTok.
Your missing the point, how can you know that if professionals can't study it? They are blocking the ability of Texas institutes from studying this!
Should we let every potentially (or even verifiably) unsafe piece of software to operate freely on government networks? No, we shouldn't, even if it's in the name of research. Knowingly running spyware on a government network isn't a good idea.
Precautions need to be taken, perhaps via cooperation between network operators and researchers, to assure that having unsafe software on their network is not potentially harmful to other users of the network.
Also, again, not every college in Texas is a state college. In fact, I think the vast majority aren't state colleges. They aren't subject to any of this regulation anyway.
On college campus networks yes. How would you have a Java class without allowing unverified software to run on the schools network?
And just because it's state schools now we should be extra worried, the Texas gop has been working to systematically disassemble all avenues of public education, the ability of colleges to college needs to be protected
How would you have a Java class without allowing unverified software to run on the schools network?
I said unsafe software. I specifically said spyware. If you're caught running malicious Java code on the network, you'll be reprimanded. If you're running known malicious apps by Big (Ad)Tech, you should also be reprimanded.
And just because it’s state schools now we should be extra worried, the Texas gop has been working to systematically disassemble all avenues of public education
If they were to completely cut all funding to public education, it's the state schools that would disappear. Private schools, who already are not affected by this ban, would be fine.
Only having private schools is a bad thing.
the limitation of public schools to perform studies on par with private institutes is bad. It should be prevented to preserve avenues to higher education.
It should be blocked in schools. Not only for the same reason as above, that they're state networks, but also that there is less than zero reason a student should be accessing TikTok at school (they're going to anyway--they'll just turn off WiFi).
Are all colleges in Texas state colleges? I don't think so. And, even so: once again, it's a state network. Students shouldn't be allowed to put TikTok on the state network. If they're a communications student, turn off WiFi, go to a coffee shop, etc. Convenience is not an excuse to lower security standards.
It's about studying and understanding the socioeconomic impacts of these apps, it's about research.
Also why the hell should a government care what is on a random students phone? There is no security threat of college students being on tiktok.
Also why the hell should a government care what is on a random students phone?
They don't. They care about what is on their network. As I said twice, you can use TikTok by turning off WiFi. Or by going to another WiFi at, say, a coffee shop.
It’s about studying and understanding the socioeconomic impacts of these apps, it’s about research.
Which is valuable, absolutely. But I'm not sure it's the responsibility of the network operator to take extra precautions that make researchers operating with potentially unsafe software safe to have on their network.
The precautions necessary to allow researchers on a college campus to access tiktok should be taken even if tiktok is banned, it's basic cyber security.
We are talking about college campuses here, not area 51. classified information or Ted cruz's flight plans shouldn't be a leak issue
The precautions necessary to allow researchers on a college campus to access tiktok should be taken even if tiktok is banned, it’s basic cyber security.
I am not sure how to interpret this sentence. How is allowing access to something that is banned cyber security?
My point is that there is no increase in cyber security on a college campus by blocking tiktok, the difference security wise between blocking and allowing it is negligible.
The ban is security theater.
Freedom of speech only applies when you're being racist or defending nazis.
The regulation in question isn't about speech; it's about installing particular software on government-issued devices, when using that software requires leaking the user's location & personal data to a foreign government.
If that is the case, we need to ban Windows worldwide.
Hmm, not a bad idea in fact, I'm in.
What non-US regime do you suspect Microsoft of leaking personal data to?
The US government is okay with companies leaking personal data to the US government.
Any with the cash to pay M$.
Israel.
Check out stuxnet.
Stuxnet, the anti-nuclear-proliferation worm?
Stuxnet, the joint US and Israel project to exploit multiple zero-days found on Windows to wreak havoc on Iran's nuclear program.
You seem to be one of the people who think Israel gets to have nukes but not their enemies. Please admit if this is true or false.
No, I'd prefer that fewer rather than more different parties had nukes, because it's easier for fewer parties to agree not to use them. Would've been nice if the Soviets never got them, too, don't you agree?
Ahh. That's a real roundabout way of agreeing with what I said.
Thank you for your shame.
Anything to admit it's okay for Israel and the US to work together to exploit windows vulnerabilities, which is how this discussion began.
To be clear, I think it's a great idea for any humans who are capable of doing so to sabotage the ability of a country that doesn't currently have nuclear weapons to obtain them. The fewer different parties have nuclear weapons, the less likely it is that there will be more nuclear explosions on this planet.
It would have been better if Israel didn't have nuclear weapons.
It would have been better if the Soviet Union didn't have nuclear weapons.
I'll go way out on a limb here, and say everyone would be better off if literally no one had nukes. Call me crazy, but dying in a nuclear hellfire isn't exactly how I want to go.
Well, yes, but that's not really an option today. Non-proliferation is an option today: preventing the list of nuclear-armed powers from getting any longer.
Ahh america, never change.
I mean, please do.
And people only care enough to do something when their dopamine dispensers stop working.
Gotta keep in mind this is a ban on 'state devices and networks.'
If you're using your own phone with your service, you should be fine.
Don't know why people are trying to use TikTok on government devices, anyways. Lazy bastards.
Yea in this case I think it's entirely reasonable. I don't think any (Ad)Tech software should be allowed on state devices or networks. It's a security concern whether it's a company in the USA or a foreign company gathering every ounce of data it can hoover up.
They are blocking schools from accessing it, preventing serious studies of the platform from taking places and restricting the progress that colleges in Texas can make, driving potential communication students out of the state.
If it did not apply to institutes of education it may be a good idea, but as is its just more culture war
Time wasting sites like YouTube or TikTok have been blocked in schools for as long as I can remember.
This isn't about blocking high schoolers from being distracted it's about blocking the institutes of learning from being able to properly study and expose how these sites are manufactured to waste time.
Good point. And it's not just time wasting, it goes against the point of being in school for education. These apps ruin attention span, erode critical thinking skills, turn beliefs into a popularity contest, contribute to bullying, destroy self-confidence and self-worth, peddle conspiracy theories, and waste time.
Edit: I want to add that I don't personally think it should be blocked in colleges. My reasons above apply to younger students; not that I don't think the app still poses risks to older students in college, but they are permitted to take the risks they wish to take. I do understand the security justification, and if that is the purported reasoning, I think it's acceptable. In reality, the security angle plus it only being TikTok being targeted is just playing on Sinophobia. If they were serious about it being a security threat, they'd not stop at TikTok.
Your missing the point, how can you know that if professionals can't study it? They are blocking the ability of Texas institutes from studying this!
Should we let every potentially (or even verifiably) unsafe piece of software to operate freely on government networks? No, we shouldn't, even if it's in the name of research. Knowingly running spyware on a government network isn't a good idea.
Precautions need to be taken, perhaps via cooperation between network operators and researchers, to assure that having unsafe software on their network is not potentially harmful to other users of the network.
Also, again, not every college in Texas is a state college. In fact, I think the vast majority aren't state colleges. They aren't subject to any of this regulation anyway.
On college campus networks yes. How would you have a Java class without allowing unverified software to run on the schools network?
And just because it's state schools now we should be extra worried, the Texas gop has been working to systematically disassemble all avenues of public education, the ability of colleges to college needs to be protected
I said unsafe software. I specifically said spyware. If you're caught running malicious Java code on the network, you'll be reprimanded. If you're running known malicious apps by Big (Ad)Tech, you should also be reprimanded.
If they were to completely cut all funding to public education, it's the state schools that would disappear. Private schools, who already are not affected by this ban, would be fine.
Only having private schools is a bad thing.
the limitation of public schools to perform studies on par with private institutes is bad. It should be prevented to preserve avenues to higher education.
It should be blocked in schools. Not only for the same reason as above, that they're state networks, but also that there is less than zero reason a student should be accessing TikTok at school (they're going to anyway--they'll just turn off WiFi).
Are all colleges in Texas state colleges? I don't think so. And, even so: once again, it's a state network. Students shouldn't be allowed to put TikTok on the state network. If they're a communications student, turn off WiFi, go to a coffee shop, etc. Convenience is not an excuse to lower security standards.
It's about studying and understanding the socioeconomic impacts of these apps, it's about research.
Also why the hell should a government care what is on a random students phone? There is no security threat of college students being on tiktok.
They don't. They care about what is on their network. As I said twice, you can use TikTok by turning off WiFi. Or by going to another WiFi at, say, a coffee shop.
Which is valuable, absolutely. But I'm not sure it's the responsibility of the network operator to take extra precautions that make researchers operating with potentially unsafe software safe to have on their network.
The precautions necessary to allow researchers on a college campus to access tiktok should be taken even if tiktok is banned, it's basic cyber security.
We are talking about college campuses here, not area 51. classified information or Ted cruz's flight plans shouldn't be a leak issue
I am not sure how to interpret this sentence. How is allowing access to something that is banned cyber security?
My point is that there is no increase in cyber security on a college campus by blocking tiktok, the difference security wise between blocking and allowing it is negligible.
The ban is security theater.
Freedom of speech only applies when you're being racist or defending nazis.
The regulation in question isn't about speech; it's about installing particular software on government-issued devices, when using that software requires leaking the user's location & personal data to a foreign government.
If that is the case, we need to ban Windows worldwide.
Hmm, not a bad idea in fact, I'm in.
What non-US regime do you suspect Microsoft of leaking personal data to?
The US government is okay with companies leaking personal data to the US government.
Any with the cash to pay M$.
Israel.
Check out stuxnet.
Stuxnet, the anti-nuclear-proliferation worm?
Stuxnet, the joint US and Israel project to exploit multiple zero-days found on Windows to wreak havoc on Iran's nuclear program.
You seem to be one of the people who think Israel gets to have nukes but not their enemies. Please admit if this is true or false.
No, I'd prefer that fewer rather than more different parties had nukes, because it's easier for fewer parties to agree not to use them. Would've been nice if the Soviets never got them, too, don't you agree?
Ahh. That's a real roundabout way of agreeing with what I said.
Thank you for your shame.
Anything to admit it's okay for Israel and the US to work together to exploit windows vulnerabilities, which is how this discussion began.
To be clear, I think it's a great idea for any humans who are capable of doing so to sabotage the ability of a country that doesn't currently have nuclear weapons to obtain them. The fewer different parties have nuclear weapons, the less likely it is that there will be more nuclear explosions on this planet.
It would have been better if Israel didn't have nuclear weapons.
It would have been better if the Soviet Union didn't have nuclear weapons.
I'll go way out on a limb here, and say everyone would be better off if literally no one had nukes. Call me crazy, but dying in a nuclear hellfire isn't exactly how I want to go.
Well, yes, but that's not really an option today. Non-proliferation is an option today: preventing the list of nuclear-armed powers from getting any longer.
Ahh america, never change.
I mean, please do.
And people only care enough to do something when their dopamine dispensers stop working.