311–320 of 1001 posts
The day TikTok is banned I will create an account and post a video showing my face, in which I will state my name and address.
It's always been an issue (sort of human nature), but it seems (to this battered old warhorse), that it's a lot more prevalent, these days, than it was, just twenty years ago.
My prediction, based off raising kids and working with teenagers? The teens are going to give a big ol' Yankee Doodle Middle Finger to Uncle Sam. They'll flock to any social media site not hosted by a US megacorp. If you don't understand why that would be then I posit you haven't spent much time around teens.
I say this as someone who was in high school as the first wave of social media sites (early Facebook, MySpace, Xanga, etc.) came up: Just get rid of all of them. They're battery acid poured on the human psyche. Or, at least, get rid of the centralized massive ones. If you have to combine your online interactions with people with the interactions you have with them in real life, you're better off, and that doesn't hap…
The more you ban, the more "centralized" and "massive" the platforms you don't ban get. Unless you literally ban everything. One has to be extremely naive to think Google (youtube) lobbyists didn't play a role in this Tiktok ban.
I say this as someone who was in high school as the first wave of social media sites (early Facebook, MySpace, Xanga, etc.) came up: Just get rid of all of them. They're battery acid poured on the human psyche. Or, at least, get rid of the centralized massive ones. If you have to combine your online interactions with people with the interactions you have with them in real life, you're better off, and that doesn't hap…
For all complains of the toxicity of the platforms. For now, the contents over there are written by your fellow human (maybe AI in a few years). Just focussing on platform closure for me indicates that we resigned from fixing our fellow folks.
We have. It's A) too expensive, and B) we can't agree on what "fixed" looks like. "Think of the children" type scare-legislation is going to fill this void.
Given how easy it is for China to buy US data legally from data brokers and how similar the functionality of TikTok and YouTube Shorts, I feel like the only explanations are: 1. The govt is mad that a foreign company is outcompeting a domestic one Or more likely, given that there are so many other industries that didn't get a ban: 2. The govt is mad that they have control over the narrative on Facebook but do not on…
> 2. The govt is mad that they have control over the narrative on Facebook but do not on TikTok If the last four years are indicative of anything, it's that the US government has fairly limited control over the narrative on American social platforms. I lost count of how many times I saw people typing in "FJB" and "MAGA".
"Throw the bums out" without any additional coherent political project is precisely what the elites allow and what allows them to maintain power.
I say this as someone who was in high school as the first wave of social media sites (early Facebook, MySpace, Xanga, etc.) came up: Just get rid of all of them. They're battery acid poured on the human psyche. Or, at least, get rid of the centralized massive ones. If you have to combine your online interactions with people with the interactions you have with them in real life, you're better off, and that doesn't hap…
> They're battery acid poured on the human psyche. At least as far as kids are concerned, current evidence does not readily support this common believe. Sabine Hossenfelder writes: "The idea that social media causes children mental health distress is plausible, but unfortunately it isn’t true. Trouble is, if you read what the press has written about it, you wouldn’t know. Scientists have described it as a “moral pani…
Why would a physicist's opinion on mental health carry any weight?
Congress shall make no law respecting ... or the right of the people peaceably to assemble ... unless they mumble 'national security', and then screw the constitution ...
Foreign corporations do not have free speech rights.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The big issue isn't data security; it's propaganda. Irrespective of whether the government has control of the narrative on Facebook (I would argue they pretty clearly don't) there is no reason to let a foreign adversary have a deniable propaganda line to millions of Americans. Would we have let the USSR acquire a major television network? And even if you disagree with the national security reasons for disallowing Chi…
[flagged]
Your links do not back up this claim. Both indicate that Butina was likely a Russian spy and desired to influence the National Rifle Association (NRA). However, neither article gives any example of successful influence, however minor.