Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Mark Zuckerberg Stoked Washington’s Fears About TikTok

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 214 posts

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Stoked Washington’s Fears About TikTok

#161

Post by ekianjo »

Aperocky wrote: post #91
holografix wrote: post #81

Reality is that while China blocks Facebook, Google, etc and smartly props up their own clones, it’s “aghast” at the American protectionism and xenophobic behaviour. How dare the Americans block a Chinese app?! China is not a democracy. It’s not interested in fairness. China is playing the long game. Just like the wars of the past were fought with little toy armies of a few thousand knights and noblemen marching into…

There's a difference, facebook did not attempt to run its social media business in China, and Google voluntarily quit so it doesn't have to comply to censorship law. Meanwhile Tiktok has a US branch and is complying with laws in the US. China has a restrictive internet where if you want to operate, you have to comply with a certain set of rules that are unsavory to say the least. Facebook, Google decided to not bothe…

> Tiktok's US branch did not violate any US law and its being prosecuted with administrative action

Seriously? That was already in 2019:

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/tiktok-pay-5-7-millio...

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Stoked Washington’s Fears About TikTok

#162

Post by wombatmobile »

dredmorbius wrote: post #90
wombatmobile wrote: post #63

It’s difficult to know what to make of Rupert Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal’s claim about Zuckerberg’s alleged claims about TikTok because I can’t read past the paywall. But there are so many informed comments here on HN,I must be the only non-subscriber, yeah? Can anyone post the article text?

http://archive.md/KMpHm

Zuckerberg's alleged "message hammered behind the scenes in meetings with officials and lawmakers during the October trip and a separate visit to Washington weeks earlier" are sourced to "people familiar with the matter."

That's not journalism; it's gossip. Or worse.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Stoked Washington’s Fears About TikTok

#163

Post by euudheehdy »

chillacy wrote: post #153
geofft wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, so - what does the American approach have to recommend it? Why shouldn't I leave for China, the apparent winning team?

Not the parent you're responding to but the answer I see is that in the modern understanding of geopolitics (like 19th century and onwards), "fairness" and "values" aren't considerations at all. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realpolitik

This is an active topic of discussion actually. In general the trinity of qualities that result in a "strong in the real way" country have been approached as realism, nationalism, and liberty. The scholarly community is currently in conflict because in the modern era one of these things is seemingly very unimportant compared to the others.

Previously, it was believed that liberty contributed to economic output for a myriad of reasons that boil down to "free markets". There's an emerging, albeit more romantically framed, belief that diversity and too much liberty are actually handicaps because both can retard a government's ability to engage in realist policy while, at the same time, deminishing the homoginizing effects of nationalism which has its own independent benefits but which also acts as a lubricant for realist action. This is not to say all assumptions and observations about liberal policies have been wrong, it's more about re-assessing our understanding about the magnitude and utility of these effects.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Stoked Washington’s Fears About TikTok

#164

Post by strogonoff »

eddieplan9 wrote: post #151
Aperocky wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that, nor do I think that is true anywhere on this planet.

Parent’s keyword is “allow to succeed”, not “succeed”. I always warn people about false equivalence when it comes to China. The laws and rules in China are not the same concept as laws and rules in the West. There are implicit rules or 潜规则. The rules and laws are only there to make things look legit. There are very few places on earth where you can be forced into citizenship so you can be deprived of consular access…

This is insane.

China abducts a Swedish citizen; recognizes and prosecutes him as citizen of China, denying Sweden access to the trial (note that China does not even have double citizenship); when concerns are raised over violations of Vienna treaty on consular relations—and hey, by this logic China can abduct anyone anywhere—China declares that (I am not joking) consular relations are on hold until COVID-19 is resolved.

How on Earth is anyone OK with this?

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Stoked Washington’s Fears About TikTok

#165

Post by sudosysgen »

double0jimb0 wrote: post #147
sudosysgen wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

YouTube does pay an order of magnitude more per view, but the average YouTube video is two orders of magnitude longer than a TikTok video, so this compares very favourably to YouTube.

I believe your valuation discounts the persuasive storytelling value of the YT’s “longerish” content. Not the greatest comparison, but YT : TikTok :: TV ad industry (2019-$70B) : Print Magazine (2019-$15B) [0] https://www.marketingcharts.com/advertising-trends-108995

I'm just comparing the rates per view to the amount of time it takes to both make and consume content. That analysis results in the conclusion that TikTok is as or more profitable for content creators.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Stoked Washington’s Fears About TikTok

#166

Post by dredmorbius »

wombatmobile wrote: post #162
dredmorbius wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://archive.md/KMpHm

Zuckerberg's alleged "message hammered behind the scenes in meetings with officials and lawmakers during the October trip and a separate visit to Washington weeks earlier" are sourced to "people familiar with the matter." That's not journalism; it's gossip. Or worse.

At least one quote acknowledges Zuckerberg's communications and is named:

Kelli Ford, a spokeswoman for Sen. Hawley said the senator’s concerns about TikTok predated the meeting with Mr. Zuckerberg. “Facebook has recently been sounding the alarm about China-based tech as a PR tactic to boost its own reputation,” she said.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Stoked Washington’s Fears About TikTok

#167

Post by [deleted] »

dredmorbius wrote: post #166
wombatmobile wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Zuckerberg's alleged "message hammered behind the scenes in meetings with officials and lawmakers during the October trip and a separate visit to Washington weeks earlier" are sourced to "people familiar with the matter." That's not journalism; it's gossip. Or worse.

At least one quote acknowledges Zuckerberg's communications and is named: Kelli Ford, a spokeswoman for Sen. Hawley said the senator’s concerns about TikTok predated the meeting with Mr. Zuckerberg. “Facebook has recently been sounding the alarm about China-based tech as a PR tactic to boost its own reputation,” she said.

[deleted]

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Stoked Washington’s Fears About TikTok

#168

Post by esyir »

baby wrote: post #82
babl-yc wrote: post #31

Facebook is banned in China. Is it unreasonable to encourage US gvt to apply pressure for a more even playing field? I know the narrative (and majority of comments) like to hate on Zuck, so just adding another perspective for this particular situation.

I actually see this rhetoric a lot, and I'm not completely disagreeing with it, but at the same time I'm scared of the effects of playing the same game with the CCP and the ramifications of such move: it seems to always end up in a "us versus them" scenario which further divides the world. If you see a few people backing the US government's decision of attacking Chinese apps, imagine how the Chinese people are being…

Seems like you'd bring about the opposite though. In a cooperate-defect scenario, it only ends in the defector's win.

Free trade only works if it goes both ways. Otherwise you're just screwing yourself to benefit your now opponent.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Stoked Washington’s Fears About TikTok

#169

Post by baby »

Aperocky wrote: post #106
baby wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you realize how impossible it is to enter the Chinese market... Google wasted a ton of money trying to enter the US market (I recommend watching this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XImsSgdr4fg ), and Facebook did too. Look at how it went for Uber. If you want to give an example of a US company that is doing much better in China, it's Apple, and the sole reason is that everybody who works for the…

There's probably a way, register facebook.cn and allow censors to censor content, store everything in a data center somewhere in China, people has to use ID to register, etc. At which point it doesn't make much sense to operate in China. This is also precisely why TikTok is not available in mainland China, because it doesn't meet those standards.

tiktok is available in mainland China, it's called douyin

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Stoked Washington’s Fears About TikTok

#170

Post by baby »

prh8 wrote: post #137
baby wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually see this rhetoric a lot, and I'm not completely disagreeing with it, but at the same time I'm scared of the effects of playing the same game with the CCP and the ramifications of such move: it seems to always end up in a "us versus them" scenario which further divides the world. If you see a few people backing the US government's decision of attacking Chinese apps, imagine how the Chinese people are being…

Is there benefit to setting an example that Chinese citizens would never see anyways?

believe me they see it, a couple years back you could ask Chinese people in the street what they thought of Americans and a lot would answer that they like the fact that they are more "free" and "open minded". There's a bunch of videos like that on youtube [1][2]. Nowadays I don't think people would say the same stuff[3].

[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gqXLxCU-fY

[2]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_E38TJpU6Q&t=451s

[3]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pOlu624glKw&t=432s

Post reply on HN