论S.686法案(封禁抖音法案) 对北美华人的影响
近期美国新闻的一个热点就是所谓的Restrict Act（封禁抖音法案），该法案有国会两党和白宫的共同支持，但是也遭到两党内部部分人士的反对（民主党的AOC和共和党的Rand Paul)。首先申明我不是抖音用户，讲实话我也觉得抖音这种成瘾性很强的社交媒体弊大于利（YouTube shorts也是一样）。另外，关于抖音对于美国国家安全的影响，我不想在这里讨论，我主要想讨论一下该法案如果通过对于美国华人（尤其是大陆移民）的影响。虽然该法案叫抖音封禁法案，但是也赋予了政府封禁其他中国软件、网站、支付方式的权利。禁抖音我无感，禁支付宝微信支付我也没关系，但是禁微信我是非常反对，因为这样将很大程度限制我和国内亲人朋友的交流，也会disfranchise北美华裔（试想美国敢封禁一个黑人用户为主体的app？）。
TikTok的问题本质是用户数据安全，美国完全可以出一个类似欧盟GDPR的法律来保护本国公民的数据安全，如果发现抖音违规，罚到它倾家荡产都可以，而S.686明显有选择性执法的执法的嫌疑。而该法语言模糊，也为未来slippery slope埋下了隐患。
之前我在别处有发过关于对于该法案的外媒评价，我也会转到下面。
TikTok的问题本质是用户数据安全，美国完全可以出一个类似欧盟GDPR的法律来保护本国公民的数据安全，如果发现抖音违规，罚到它倾家荡产都可以，而S.686明显有选择性执法的执法的嫌疑。而该法语言模糊，也为未来slippery slope埋下了隐患。
之前我在别处有发过关于对于该法案的外媒评价，我也会转到下面。
2 个评论
另外在Reddit上看到关于此事的讨论，讲实话不是很多，搜出了的都是几天前的讨论，但是有网友反映自己在FB上的帖子被限流了（能发出去，好友notification上没有更新和推送）。
以下是vice的报道链接：
https://www.vice.com/en/article/4a3ddb/restrict-act-insanely-broad-ban-tiktok-vpns
禁TikTok初衷是好的，但是看法案内容，国会似乎是在借TikTok的东风打造美国版GFW。该法案的目前版本的主要问题有以下几个
1、缺乏监督。商务部可以禁止一切来自于国外竞争对手的技术，这样的法案现在可以用来禁止TikTok，未来也可以用来禁止telegram，不受民众监督。而核心问题，保护用户数据安全，该法案则完全没有涉及到。
Under the RESTRICT Act, the Department of Commerce would identify information and communications technology products that a foreign adversary has any interest in, or poses an unacceptable risk to national security, the announcement reads. The bill only applies to technology linked to a “foreign adversary.” Those countries include China (as well as Hong Kong); Cuba; Iran; North Korea; Russia, and Venezuela.
2、语言模糊，这个法案能做到的远远超过了禁TikTok，未来一切的来自中国的软件都可能被禁止。
The bill’s language includes vague terms such as “desktop applications,” “mobile applications,” “gaming applications,” “payment applications,” and “web-based applications.” It also targets applicable software that has more than 1 million users in the U.S.
3、使用VPN连接TikTok将入罪，
情况严重者，比如干涉美国选举，危害美国国家安全，颠覆政府，最长入狱20年罚金100万美元。比如哪天美国认为虚拟货币危害到美国金融安全，也可以引用该法对比特币交易和持有进行处罚。
VPNs protect users online by running their activity through a server in a different location and changing their online signature in the process, sometimes allowing users to bypass local restrictions. VPNs are entirely legal in the United States, but some users claim that the use of the VPN could be considered criminal under the terms of the RESTRICT Act if it was used to access the Chinese or Russian internet.
The Restrict Act is INSANE," crypto investor Jesse Eckel tweeted. "20 years in prison for using a VPN. The ability for them to target essentially anything they deem a 'risk.' Seizure of property and digital assets. Could’ve simply banned Tiktok, but instead they go full villain on us."
Cohen said that someone would need to be in "sabotage or subversion" of American technology, causing "catastrophic effects" or "interfering in, or altering the result" with a federal election to be held liable under the proposed legislation.
4、危害言论自由。依据该法，所有有境外关系的通讯软件都有可能被禁止，这将危害美国人民的言论自由。
“The RESTRICT Act could lead to apps and other ICT services with connections to certain foreign countries being banned in the United States. Any bill that would allow the US government to ban an online service that facilitates Americans' speech raises serious First Amendment concerns,” Caitlin Vogus, deputy director of the Center for Democracy & Technology’s Free Expression Project, told Motherboard in an emailed statement. “In addition, while bills like the RESTRICT Act may be motivated by legitimate privacy concerns, banning ICT services with connections to foreign countries would not necessarily help protect Americans' privacy. Those countries may still obtain data through other means, like by purchasing it from private data brokers.”
以下是vice的报道链接：
https://www.vice.com/en/article/4a3ddb/restrict-act-insanely-broad-ban-tiktok-vpns
禁TikTok初衷是好的，但是看法案内容，国会似乎是在借TikTok的东风打造美国版GFW。该法案的目前版本的主要问题有以下几个
1、缺乏监督。商务部可以禁止一切来自于国外竞争对手的技术，这样的法案现在可以用来禁止TikTok，未来也可以用来禁止telegram，不受民众监督。而核心问题，保护用户数据安全，该法案则完全没有涉及到。
Under the RESTRICT Act, the Department of Commerce would identify information and communications technology products that a foreign adversary has any interest in, or poses an unacceptable risk to national security, the announcement reads. The bill only applies to technology linked to a “foreign adversary.” Those countries include China (as well as Hong Kong); Cuba; Iran; North Korea; Russia, and Venezuela.
2、语言模糊，这个法案能做到的远远超过了禁TikTok，未来一切的来自中国的软件都可能被禁止。
The bill’s language includes vague terms such as “desktop applications,” “mobile applications,” “gaming applications,” “payment applications,” and “web-based applications.” It also targets applicable software that has more than 1 million users in the U.S.
3、使用VPN连接TikTok将入罪，
情况严重者，比如干涉美国选举，危害美国国家安全，颠覆政府，最长入狱20年罚金100万美元。比如哪天美国认为虚拟货币危害到美国金融安全，也可以引用该法对比特币交易和持有进行处罚。
VPNs protect users online by running their activity through a server in a different location and changing their online signature in the process, sometimes allowing users to bypass local restrictions. VPNs are entirely legal in the United States, but some users claim that the use of the VPN could be considered criminal under the terms of the RESTRICT Act if it was used to access the Chinese or Russian internet.
The Restrict Act is INSANE," crypto investor Jesse Eckel tweeted. "20 years in prison for using a VPN. The ability for them to target essentially anything they deem a 'risk.' Seizure of property and digital assets. Could’ve simply banned Tiktok, but instead they go full villain on us."
Cohen said that someone would need to be in "sabotage or subversion" of American technology, causing "catastrophic effects" or "interfering in, or altering the result" with a federal election to be held liable under the proposed legislation.
4、危害言论自由。依据该法，所有有境外关系的通讯软件都有可能被禁止，这将危害美国人民的言论自由。
“The RESTRICT Act could lead to apps and other ICT services with connections to certain foreign countries being banned in the United States. Any bill that would allow the US government to ban an online service that facilitates Americans' speech raises serious First Amendment concerns,” Caitlin Vogus, deputy director of the Center for Democracy & Technology’s Free Expression Project, told Motherboard in an emailed statement. “In addition, while bills like the RESTRICT Act may be motivated by legitimate privacy concerns, banning ICT services with connections to foreign countries would not necessarily help protect Americans' privacy. Those countries may still obtain data through other means, like by purchasing it from private data brokers.”
支持楼主发表意见，反对楼主立场。
建墙的是中国，利用墙来危害美国企业利益的也是中国。美国采取对等制裁天经地义，华裔不怪中国封锁WhatsApp，却怪美国封锁微信，没有任何道理。而且总有Skype之类舔共的产品可以使用，实在不行，也可以打电话嘛。
建墙的是中国，利用墙来危害美国企业利益的也是中国。美国采取对等制裁天经地义，华裔不怪中国封锁WhatsApp，却怪美国封锁微信，没有任何道理。而且总有Skype之类舔共的产品可以使用，实在不行，也可以打电话嘛。