401–410 of 445 posts
TikTok’s popularity is already waning in the U.S. Installs of the app are down 33% YoY in November, from 6.6MM in November '21 to 4.5MM in November '22. -0.3% YoY worldwide. In fact, Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp outgrew TikTok and even YouTube during this period: https://twitter.com/eric_seufert/status/1602045164016615428?...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's what this law is about. > In 2018, media reports that Google was working on a prototype for another censored Chinese search engine surfaced, which was met with backlash from some Google employees. The development, called ‘Project Dragonfly,’ was shortly after suspended, according to The Intercept. The US government did not force Google to stop Dragonfly.
Congress called multiple hearings on Dragonfly and many politicians criticized it. China only ever enforced its consistent censorship policies without targeting any foreign company. Doing this you would admit is an aggressive move to target a Chinese company rather than a reciprocal action as the parent insinuated.
If China can enforce a censorship policy, America can enforce a consistent not-based-in-China policy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Maybe I didn't understand your comment though. Yes, you have misunderstood. GP asked what shade of gray goes with US gov running appstore. I responded with a fascist imagery - gray uniforms and black boots. [Those would be certain Americans wearing boots ..] I agree with GP that taking a totalitarian regime (CPC's China) as a role model is not the right choice for us, at all.
Sorry about that! Completely missed the point. I agree with you fwiw.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
? Don't understand what you're saying, is it related to my comment?
ARM China, pardon me.
Also, be careful emitting hate for individuals or groups of people based on an identity. You would look very silly recorded on the internet being xenophobic and racist.
1: https://www.wsj.com/articles/facebook-ceo-mark-zuckerberg-st...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
ARM China, pardon me.
What about it? It was wholly owned until Softbank decided to sell half of it in 2018. You can just google this. Now it's wholly owned again after the whole kerfuffle.
https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Caixin/In-Depth-How-SoftBa...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Congress called multiple hearings on Dragonfly and many politicians criticized it. China only ever enforced its consistent censorship policies without targeting any foreign company. Doing this you would admit is an aggressive move to target a Chinese company rather than a reciprocal action as the parent insinuated.
In other words, nobody forced Google to cancel Dragonfly. If China can enforce a censorship policy, America can enforce a consistent not-based-in-China policy.
America can do anything it wants, I just wanted to dispute the idea that it would be a reciprocal action. I think it would be a pretty big uncalled for escalation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In other words, nobody forced Google to cancel Dragonfly. If China can enforce a censorship policy, America can enforce a consistent not-based-in-China policy.
I'll stick with my formulation of politicians in the US forced China to end Dragonfly, thanks. America can do anything it wants, I just wanted to dispute the idea that it would be a reciprocal action. I think it would be a pretty big uncalled for escalation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What about it? It was wholly owned until Softbank decided to sell half of it in 2018. You can just google this. Now it's wholly owned again after the whole kerfuffle.
Sell 51%, you mean. And 51% is still owned by Chinese investors. https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Caixin/In-Depth-How-SoftBa...