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

TikTok says it is restoring service for U.S. users

nbcnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 1001 posts

Re: TikTok says it is restoring service for U.S. users

#351

Post by simion314 »

hcurtiss wrote: post #224

By saying China's using Tik Tok to subvert "democracy," aren't we really saying voters are not individual agents but rather a mob subject to manipulation by propaganda? I sometimes cannot believe it's those who so loudly cry about threats to "democracy" that simultaneously take such a cynical view of the democratic process. Rather than tackle the narratives substantively, they'd argue about who gets to manipulate the…

Why is illegal to put false stuff on products label, like food or medicine? Where is the free speech to lie and manipulate the user? With your point of view the EACH user should somehow find the skills to analyze and review each product each time they user or trust some other persons word.

The algorithm is not a person to have free speech, my issue is with the algorithm, I am OK with the village drunk to post his faked documents but I am not O with state actors falsifing documents then same state owned actors abusing the algorithm to spread that false stuff. So no free spech for bot farms and algorithms, they are not people (yet)

Re: TikTok says it is restoring service for U.S. users

#352

Post by mbesto »

olalonde wrote: post #282
hcurtiss wrote: post #224

By saying China's using Tik Tok to subvert "democracy," aren't we really saying voters are not individual agents but rather a mob subject to manipulation by propaganda? I sometimes cannot believe it's those who so loudly cry about threats to "democracy" that simultaneously take such a cynical view of the democratic process. Rather than tackle the narratives substantively, they'd argue about who gets to manipulate the…

Bingo. I never understood why "foreign influence" was supposed to be a bad thing. Free speech is grounded in the idea that people are capable of reasoning and forming their own opinions. If we truly trust in that, the source of the influence - foreign or domestic - shouldn’t matter. People who advocate for censoring foreign sources of influence are implicitly admitting that they don't trust their population to think…

> Free speech is grounded in the idea that people are capable of reasoning and forming their own opinions. If we truly trust in that, the source of the influence - foreign or domestic - shouldn’t matter.

Sure, but then why is electioneering banned by polling places? Or why is voter intimidation illegal? You have the draw the line somewhere.

> are implicitly admitting that they don't trust their population to think critically.

A democracy that is NOT a direct democracy is already admitting this. This is exactly the reason we have proxies in a representative democracy.

Re: TikTok says it is restoring service for U.S. users

#353

Post by dp-hackernews »

Buttons840 wrote: post #45

The TikTok debate has always been about the balance between national security and free speech. We found a compromise. TikTok will remain, all of its national security risks will remain. Also, the law that tramples free speech is upheld by the court, but will be blantently ignored and unenforced. Everybody loses. This outcome is worse than anyone could have conceived.

Chase Hughes:

"Manipulation Playbook: The 20 Indicators of Reality Control"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3AN2wY4qAM

Re: TikTok says it is restoring service for U.S. users

#354

Post by drdaeman »

olalonde wrote: post #282
hcurtiss wrote: post #224

By saying China's using Tik Tok to subvert "democracy," aren't we really saying voters are not individual agents but rather a mob subject to manipulation by propaganda? I sometimes cannot believe it's those who so loudly cry about threats to "democracy" that simultaneously take such a cynical view of the democratic process. Rather than tackle the narratives substantively, they'd argue about who gets to manipulate the…

Bingo. I never understood why "foreign influence" was supposed to be a bad thing. Free speech is grounded in the idea that people are capable of reasoning and forming their own opinions. If we truly trust in that, the source of the influence - foreign or domestic - shouldn’t matter. People who advocate for censoring foreign sources of influence are implicitly admitting that they don't trust their population to think…

> people are capable of reasoning and forming their own opinions

The problem is that people aren't ideal rational agents. Our collective reasoning tends to be heavily biased by the environment, and that there are actors who abuse this (by injecting ideas that indirectly help their agendas) for their personal gains. And in China's case, they want to undermine freedoms, including freedom of speech.

We can consider ourselves as "rational, critical thinkers" all we want, but we aren't as there are myriads of ways we're gullible in one way or another. Plenty of examples in our history books.

Still, I think that free speech is still more important, as it's the only way for a society to recover. With freedom of speech, an antidote (for a lack of better term) can eventually be found and injected into the public discourse, without it the future looks bleak.

The way I see it, we need to encourage improvement of education on social sciences, human psychology, game theory and so on, encourage critical thinking but forewarn of all possible fallacies, and hope that it will be enough and that the inevitable counter-reaction won't prevail and undermine the effort.

Re: TikTok says it is restoring service for U.S. users

#355

Post by atlintots »

whimsicalism wrote: post #82
mikeweiss wrote: post #25

Trump and team may be the biggest public relations masterminds of all time. They realize that the populous is fickle and easily won over with obvious stunts. Define the villains and play the hero. It keeps working for him over and over and over. Truly incredible.

[flagged]

But Trump started the ban.

Re: TikTok says it is restoring service for U.S. users

#356

Post by johnnyanmac »

olalonde wrote: post #282
hcurtiss wrote: post #224

By saying China's using Tik Tok to subvert "democracy," aren't we really saying voters are not individual agents but rather a mob subject to manipulation by propaganda? I sometimes cannot believe it's those who so loudly cry about threats to "democracy" that simultaneously take such a cynical view of the democratic process. Rather than tackle the narratives substantively, they'd argue about who gets to manipulate the…

Bingo. I never understood why "foreign influence" was supposed to be a bad thing. Free speech is grounded in the idea that people are capable of reasoning and forming their own opinions. If we truly trust in that, the source of the influence - foreign or domestic - shouldn’t matter. People who advocate for censoring foreign sources of influence are implicitly admitting that they don't trust their population to think…

plenty of dangers, but considering what people actually do and care about on TikTok, I wouldn't really compare this to Facebook.

>People who advocate for censoring foreign sources of influence are implicitly admitting that they don't trust their population to think critically.

Tbf, America did spend decades tearing down education to help support that conclusion.

Re: TikTok says it is restoring service for U.S. users

#358

Post by arrosenberg »

gdhkgdhkvff wrote: post #326
hbarka wrote: post #196

“Congressman Michael McCaul (R-TX), the author of the bill to ban TikTok, owns hundreds of thousands of dollars of stock in Meta, one of TikTok's chief rivals. Senator Markwayne Mullin (R-OK) bought up to $50,000 worth of Meta stock last January before voting to ban TikTok in April." Exhibit 1. https://www.capitoltrades.com/issuers/431610?page=2

Couldn’t find recent info but back in 2014, Michael McCaul’s net worth was in the hundreds of millions. Hundreds of thousands of dollars in meta stock doesn’t seem like much for someone worth 1000 times that amount over a decade ago… Markeayne Mullin’s net worth was ~$50 million a few years ago. $50k is 1/1000th of that networth also… That’s not to say congress shouldn’t be banned from trading stocks like every other…

> Hundreds of thousands of dollars in meta stock doesn’t seem like much for someone worth 1000 times that amount over a decade ago…

That fact that it was a drop in the bucket for them makes it that much more outrageous, not less. It would have cost virtually nothing for them to avoid the appearance of impropriety, and yet they didn't. And why should they? There was no consequence. They are taunting us.

If you or I trade off anything close to insider information, we'd be in jail and lose most of our (ostensibly much more limited) assets.

Re: TikTok says it is restoring service for U.S. users

#359

Post by threeseed »

djcapelis wrote: post #132
sekai wrote: post #57

The people pretending that the TikTok law is a speech issue are ignoring that no one was requiring TikTok to change their content at all. The law was written to allow for 0 impact on users if the CCP-connected parent company simply divested. Their preference to shut down instead of receiving tens of billions of dollars would be a clear violation of a company’s fiduciary duty to shareholders for any normal company. Bu…

I’m not arguing it’s a restriction on TikTok’s speech or bytedance’s speech. It’s a restriction on my speech. Telling me where I can publish a video? Telling me what apps I can download? Telling my software vendor what software they’re allowed to let me get? Telling internet providers what servers they’re allowed to let my device access? The law doesn’t fine TikTok. The law fines the people who let me download an app…

> It’s a restriction on my speech. Telling me where I can publish a video? Telling me what apps I can download? Telling my software vendor what software they’re allowed to let me get? Telling internet providers what servers they’re allowed to let my device access?

You are being ridiculous now. None of those are forms of speech.

And restrictions on your ability to perform certain actions is literally what being in a society is about. If you don't like it then find another society. Just like you can find another ISP, place to publish your video or platform to use apps you want to use.

Re: TikTok says it is restoring service for U.S. users

#360

Post by nickthegreek »

kristjansson wrote: post #131
plutoh28 wrote: post #98

Trump's proposed executive order just gives TikTok more time "so that a deal could be made." Honestly I don't understand how TikTok is able to restore service now before the executive order or even the inaugaration has occured.

There was no legal requirement they block service at all, only that other companies stop doing business with them (i.e. App Stores stop distributing, etc.)

Pretty sure Oracle had to turn off the servers. I feel like Oracle is now not complying with the law. Apple and Google appear to be as of writing this.
Post reply on HN