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

91–100 of 307 posts

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

#91

Post by kelnos »

Miner49er wrote: post #10
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...

This isn't a choice being made by TikTok, this is due to regulations/laws in China. If the US passed laws requiring TikTok to do the same in the US, they would obviously comply.

> If the US passed laws requiring TikTok to do the same in the US, they would obviously comply.

Except for the part where that law would end up being declared unconstitutional, and rightly so. Then again, if TikTok has no US ownership, perhaps it would pass constitutional muster. 1A doesn't specifically mention US citizens or US-owned corporations, though, just that that government shall pass no laws abridging the freedom of speech, so maybe not.

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

#92

Post by protoc »

mcculley wrote: post #7
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...

How would a skeptic confirm this? Can one get a VPN inside China?

you can download the douyin app or goto https://www.douyin.com/

The more stupid things you look for, the more stupid things you see. Its the same in the us as it is in china.

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

#93

Post by mcculley »

chucksta wrote: post #22
mcculley wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would a skeptic confirm this? Can one get a VPN inside China?

It's open policy, from the link; https://www.china-briefing.com/news/china-passes-sweeping-re... http://www.cac.gov.cn/2022-01/04/c_1642894606364259.htm

I am aware of these policies. It is not clear to me that they are having the claimed effect.

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

#94

Post by emodendroket »

wildrhythms wrote: post #81
onetimeusename wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is a serious issue but underestimated. People in the US believe that the top science and engineering roles should be filled by immigrants which I don't think is sustainable or even a healthy view of education. I am basing this on the huge foreign population of our top schools and the push for H1-B visas. It can be a self fulfilling prophecy if people remove themselves from the running for STEM in earlier…

>People in the US believe that the top science and engineering roles should be filled by immigrants Huh? Anecdotally, I have never heard this sentiment before.

People who hold this view are mostly employers as far as I'm aware, unless we're conflating having a generally sympathetic view to skilled immigrants with not wanting Americans to learn engineering.

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

#95

Post by emodendroket »

htag wrote: post #59
onetimeusename wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is a serious issue but underestimated. People in the US believe that the top science and engineering roles should be filled by immigrants which I don't think is sustainable or even a healthy view of education. I am basing this on the huge foreign population of our top schools and the push for H1-B visas. It can be a self fulfilling prophecy if people remove themselves from the running for STEM in earlier…

The linked study is for children aged 8-12. How does a 12 year old "remove themselves from the running for STEM"? A six grader taking average math/science classes and getting average grades is on track for qualifying for a science/engineering/math undergraduate program. There's even opportunities later in life for those struggling in school to join STEM. When I was 12 all my friends wanted to be rock stars or profess…

I agree that this feels a bit like a moral panic and wanting to be a YouTuber doesn't seem that different from wanting to be an actor, singer, or pro sports player, all dreams many more children have nursed in the past than have pursued in adulthood.

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

#96

Post by LordDragonfang »

nonethewiser wrote: post #71
cauthon wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Liars are capable of telling the truth, but that doesn't mean you should assume what they say is true without corroboration.

https://www.politifact.com/personalities/tucker-carlson/

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

#97

Post by DiogenesKynikos »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #38
Miner49er wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't a choice being made by TikTok, this is due to regulations/laws in China. If the US passed laws requiring TikTok to do the same in the US, they would obviously comply.

No, it is almost certainly deliberate. In China, all companies with more than 50 employees are legally obligated to have dedicated Chinese Communist Party representatives overseeing, according to Harvard Business Publishing ( https://hbsp.harvard.edu/product/R1403J-HCB-ENG ). Social media companies? They probably have tons of mandatory representatives guiding the system. ByteDance also had a "nominal" 1% ownership ta…

This is a paranoid vision of how China works.

TikTok is a private company that wants to make money. If it could make more money by showing Chinese audiences more trashy content, it absolutely would. And in fact, it does show a great deal of mindless content in China.

However, as is well known, China has recently been trying to regulate children's use of the internet (e.g., time limits on internet gaming). If companies were already willingly doing what the Communist Party wants, the Chinese government wouldn't have to pass these new regulations in the first place. And guess what happens when the government passes these sorts of regulations? Companies immediately start looking for ways to skirt them.

> legally obligated to have dedicated Chinese Communist Party representatives overseeing

No, at least legally, these committees have no oversight role in private companies. Companies with over 50 employees are required to allow a Party committee to organize and meet, but it doesn't have a role in management.

There are far too many grand statements nowadays about how China works, coming from sources that don't actually seem to be very familiar with the country. There is a very strong tendency in the West now to view everything about China through a paranoid lens. The truth is usually much more boring.

In this case, the truth is that Douyin (TikTok in China) has plenty of trashy content, but that there's more government regulation than before.

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

#98

Post by kelnos »

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…

FCC rules are in place because those things you mention are a part of the commons. Publicly-viewable by anyone, and also exclusionary: someone broadcasting on particular airwaves or putting up advertisements takes up physical space that no one else can use.

That's... not the same as a service on the internet, at all.

You're also talking about a completely different regulation regime. The FCC rules prohibit certain (fairly narrow?) things, largely "obscenity". A regulation that requires a company to actively promote certain things is... not even remotely the same.

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

#100

Post by the_lonely_road »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #66
cauthon wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Yes. https://www.china-briefing.com/news/china-passes-sweeping-re... If you want to verify it yourself, go to China, open Douyin. Plus, the story makes internal sense - for example, pornography and the kind of soft-core porn, heavily revealing clothing, and so forth that appears on TikTok is actually illegal in China. Post it, you'd get it censored and removed.

You should see the porn on Reddit. This is an American consumer issue not a foreign nation issue.
Post reply on HN