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

South Dakota first to ban TikTok on state-owned devices

gizmodo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 307 posts

Re: South Dakota first to ban TikTok on state-owned devices

#71

Post by nonethewiser »

cauthon wrote: post #57
hammock wrote: post #5

The bigger deal (bigger than the tracking that people usually focus on) might be how the algorithm is specifically tuned to reward dumb content in the US, compared to rewarding STEM and other educational content in China. One minute video that explains: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hus9fWz0RRk Further reading: https://www.opindia.com/2022/07/tiktok-china-engineering-oth...

The primary source of your "further reading" article is Tucker Carlson. Not saying the claim is incorrect, but are there any trustworthy sources supporting it?

Given that the source is corroborated, looks like the Tucker Carlson source can be trusted.

Your opinion on reputation is just that.

Re: South Dakota first to ban TikTok on state-owned devices

#72

Post by nerdix »

Dig1t wrote: post #62
pjc50 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US doesn't reward factual programming, that's why the History Channel turned into the Ancient Aliens Channel.

This made me laugh, it’s so true! Growing up I absolutely loved the History Channel, once they became the ancient aliens and Pawn Stars channel, I was so sad. Similar thing happened to G4 tech TV.

It was my favorite channel too. You could see the change start to happen around the mid-00s.

By the late 00s/early 10s it was all Pawn Stars and American Pickers.

Re: South Dakota first to ban TikTok on state-owned devices

#74

Post by SoftTalker »

hammock wrote: post #5

The bigger deal (bigger than the tracking that people usually focus on) might be how the algorithm is specifically tuned to reward dumb content in the US, compared to rewarding STEM and other educational content in China. One minute video that explains: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hus9fWz0RRk Further reading: https://www.opindia.com/2022/07/tiktok-china-engineering-oth...

It's more than dumb content. Tiktok is pushing political agendas.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/emilybaker-white/2022/11/30/tik...

Re: South Dakota first to ban TikTok on state-owned devices

#75

Post by Barrin92 »

hammock wrote: post #5

The bigger deal (bigger than the tracking that people usually focus on) might be how the algorithm is specifically tuned to reward dumb content in the US, compared to rewarding STEM and other educational content in China. One minute video that explains: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hus9fWz0RRk Further reading: https://www.opindia.com/2022/07/tiktok-china-engineering-oth...

that's because Americans want that content, and that precedes TikTok by a few decades. Literally every American media channel reflects that.

I've seen China blamed for a lot of things, some legitimate, but they didn't force Americans to pick the Kardashians over engineering degrees. American public discourse is becoming that Eric Andre show meme except it's "why did China make me do this"

Re: South Dakota first to ban TikTok on state-owned devices

#76

Post by blopker »

hammock wrote: post #5

The bigger deal (bigger than the tracking that people usually focus on) might be how the algorithm is specifically tuned to reward dumb content in the US, compared to rewarding STEM and other educational content in China. One minute video that explains: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hus9fWz0RRk Further reading: https://www.opindia.com/2022/07/tiktok-china-engineering-oth...

I'm not sure if this claim is true or not, but the person in your first reference is Andrew Schulz. He's a comedian who has already come out to say that he made all that up, and the media just ran with it [0].

[0]: https://youtube.com/shorts/tAV3QkzHC5E

Re: South Dakota first to ban TikTok on state-owned devices

#77

Post by hutzlibu »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #51
lo_zamoyski wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are you proposing exactly? That the US government moderate YouTube content?

The FCC has the authority to ban swearing and nudity on public television. States can ban nudity, profanity, and (in my state) adult video-store ads from highway signage. States can control what teachers instruct students with (who wants a flat-earth teacher?) I don't see why a law, which generically states that recommendation algorithms operated by a publicly-owned company must bias towards intellectually stimulatin…

I have seen and heard way too many dumb things by people in suits in the finest language, so I do not think focusing on this is helping much.

"recommendation algorithms operated by a publicly-owned company must bias towards intellectually stimulating content"

How would you even define "intellectually stimulating content" in juristical clear terms?

If I would want to increase the general level of science education (I strongly do), I would increase funding to schools and enable them to have fun experiments with the students of all sorts.

I love science, ever have and my teachers did the best they could, but even to me school was booring as hell.

Re: South Dakota first to ban TikTok on state-owned devices

#78

Post by mullingitover »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #51
lo_zamoyski wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are you proposing exactly? That the US government moderate YouTube content?

The FCC has the authority to ban swearing and nudity on public television. States can ban nudity, profanity, and (in my state) adult video-store ads from highway signage. States can control what teachers instruct students with (who wants a flat-earth teacher?) I don't see why a law, which generically states that recommendation algorithms operated by a publicly-owned company must bias towards intellectually stimulatin…

> I don't see why a law, which generically states that recommendation algorithms operated by a publicly-owned company must bias towards intellectually stimulating content, would necessarily be a violation of the First Amendment without undermining earlier accepted laws.

This is an extremely misleading line of reasoning.

Publicly traded companies are not 'public' in the same sense as publicly owned airwaves, public (that is, government) employees, and public property. They don't cede any constitutional rights simply by offering equity for sale in the capital markets.

Re: South Dakota first to ban TikTok on state-owned devices

#79

Post by gjsman-1000 »

blopker wrote: post #76
hammock wrote: post #5

The bigger deal (bigger than the tracking that people usually focus on) might be how the algorithm is specifically tuned to reward dumb content in the US, compared to rewarding STEM and other educational content in China. One minute video that explains: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hus9fWz0RRk Further reading: https://www.opindia.com/2022/07/tiktok-china-engineering-oth...

I'm not sure if this claim is true or not, but the person in your first reference is Andrew Schulz. He's a comedian who has already come out to say that he made all that up, and the media just ran with it [0]. [0]: https://youtube.com/shorts/tAV3QkzHC5E

So he made it up thinking it was fake - but now it has been independently shown to be likely true. In which case he made up a conspiracy theory then demonstrated to be accurate when he thought it was a joke.

https://www.china-briefing.com/news/china-passes-sweeping-re...

https://www.deseret.com/2022/11/24/23467181/difference-betwe...

CBS 60 Minutes Interview with an IT expert just 3 weeks ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0j0xzuh-6rY

Post reply on HN