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

231–240 of 307 posts

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

#231

Post by computerfriend »

Kreutzer wrote: post #37
andrewstuart wrote: post #13

It matters which country controls the platform. The recent protests in China have been suppressed by the CCP. No doubt there are close to zero protest videos on TikTok. There are protest videos on YouTube - though anecdotally YouTube management is attempting to suppress them because Google is tightly bound to China. The question is, does it matter if protest videos are shown or hidden on social media? Can the videos…

The actual amount of protests in China were laughably small in comparison to how the state depart... I mean 'free press' in the US portrayed it. Yes, there were reasonable protests against zero-Covid measures, no there was no revolution in progress.

They were not laughably small in comparison to other protests in China, which as I'm sure you know are extremely rare ever since the Tienanmen Square massacre in 1989.

> no there was no revolution in progress.

Who said there was?

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

#232

Post by DocTomoe »

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...

Sounds like a hen/egg problem: It could well be that educational content just performs better in a market where education is valued both by society as well as kids, as compared to a market where most kids want to become an "influencer".

That western notice-me-culture has been obvious long before TikTok was a thing - consider reality TV, early YouTube, and the fact that several serial killers apparently murdered for the media attention.

Our own culture treats education as something that's not really that important. We promote sports stars with little to no educational background to ivy league universities. Hardly a teenage movie does not take a dump on 'math class'. Our kids are being told to dream and find their passions, but no-one considers them a failure if they get a D in the sciences. The student who excels is not praised societally, but shunned as a 'nerd'. Where 'hustle culture' exists, it is not seen as a way of achievement, but as a way to greater wealth, and almost always unpleasant.

Why then are we surprised that educational content does not perform well in the West?

As for the second link's part about TikTok promoting sexual confusion: Was it TikTok which started that discussion, or was it celebrities who made alternative sex/gender assignments cool (much like they made smoking cool in the 1950s), supported by pro-sex/gender-divergent activists? Imagine the backlash should TikTok decide to ban these topics from their platform.

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

#233

Post by wyldfire »

cesarb wrote: post #52
ketzo wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, their official MFA policy was "just go find a random one"? How would that even work? Do they have a contract with every MFA service?

> How would that even work? TOTP is a standard ( https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6238 ), so I don't see how that wouldn't work.

It wouldn't work if the app implementing TOTP decided to share the seeds you stored in it.

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

#234

Post by chrischen »

musk_micropenis wrote: post #148
nemothekid wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The claim isn't fake. But the idea that this is some TikTok plot to poison America is ridiculous and sinophobic. Douyin is happy show low brow garbage to Chinese netizens, just like chinese gaming companies were happy to let teens play video games 24/7. The difference is the Chinese government won't let them. America could easily do what China did here: enforce regulations on what kind of content social media compani…

Please don't resort to conflating criticism of China (however speculative) with Sinophobia. It lowers the tone of the discussion and imputes a motive onto your peers which isn't warranted. If you have a problem with the facts of the discussion then address them directly.

He did address the facts of the discussion... The fact is jumping to some ridiculous conclusion that there must be some conspiracy to feed dumb content to Americans is Sinophobic because there is no evidence to suggest such a ridiculous thing, when the obvious answer, as pointed out by grandparent, is much more reasonable of an explanation.

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

#235

Post by chrischen »

philliphaydon wrote: post #204
nemothekid wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you want TikTok banned in the US because they don't have proper data hygiene and you believe that data could be used by the CCP in the future that is fair. If you want TikTok banned in the US because you believe that they promote dumb content as part of some strategic Chinese plot and you conveniently ignore Meta and Google, I'm going to assume that your reasoning comes from irrational fear of the Chinese. It does…

You seem to try to make everyone sound racist by calling everything Chinese rather than single out the government. People here don’t hate Chinese people. They hate the CCP.

Trying to single out the government from the people is a convenient way to justify an anti-China stance. Have you even considered the fact that even if the majority of Chinese may not like their own government, that doesn't mean they support yours?

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

#236

Post by DocTomoe »

patrickthebold wrote: post #63
hammock wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This isn't a choice being made by TikTok, this is...China Perhaps a distinction without a difference

I actually think it's a good point. There's no way in the US we'd tolerate the government regulating the content on the platform.

The US government have regulating contents on broadcasters since forever.

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

#237

Post by DocTomoe »

cesarb wrote: post #52
ketzo wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, their official MFA policy was "just go find a random one"? How would that even work? Do they have a contract with every MFA service?

> How would that even work? TOTP is a standard ( https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6238 ), so I don't see how that wouldn't work.

Let's just assume that not ALL government agencies employ rocket scientists.

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

#238

Post by croes »

causi wrote: post #222
nemothekid wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Repeating a previous comment: If you want TikTok banned in the US because they don't have proper data hygiene and you believe that data could be used by the CCP in the future that is fair. If you want TikTok banned in the US because you believe that they promote dumb content as part of some strategic Chinese plot and you conveniently ignore Meta and Google, I'm going to assume that your reasoning comes from irrationa…

I think Sinophobia is the wrong word. If you're playing for the blue team against the red team you're not red-team-phobic.

If you think every red is in team red and everything red does is part of playing a against team blue then you are red-team-phobic.

Try replacing red with black or jewish and look how it sounds.

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

#239

Post by causi »

croes wrote: post #238
causi wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think Sinophobia is the wrong word. If you're playing for the blue team against the red team you're not red-team-phobic.

If you think every red is in team red and everything red does is part of playing a against team blue then you are red-team-phobic. Try replacing red with black or jewish and look how it sounds.

The CCP is not a race. Working against companies under the control or influence of the CCP is no more "Sinophobic" than working against companies under the control or influence of the Nazi government was "Germanophobic".

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

#240

Post by philliphaydon »

chrischen wrote: post #235
philliphaydon wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to try to make everyone sound racist by calling everything Chinese rather than single out the government. People here don’t hate Chinese people. They hate the CCP.

Trying to single out the government from the people is a convenient way to justify an anti-China stance. Have you even considered the fact that even if the majority of Chinese may not like their own government, that doesn't mean they support yours?

At the end of the day calling everything anti China and racist is just a way of deflecting and trying to justify what the government is doing.

No one is here defending their own government. Most people in most countries will freely admit when their governments do stuff that’s wrong.

But only CCP shills are here defending the CCP and trying to justify genocide, cross border arrests, mass censorship, etc etc.

For the record. Do I support my government being the NZ government. Nope. They are trying to pass some laws to prevent the next government from being able to roll anything back. Cement the things they implement even if the citizens disagree.

Post reply on HN