Trump says he will ban TikTok through executive action

Post by christkv » Sat, Aug 01, 2020, 2:24 PM UTC

yorwba wrote: post #442

llamaimperative wrote: post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would suggest that “media company” is a westernized, capitalist, and therefore inaccurate description of what Bytedance is. It, like all other media in China, is an extension of the state. I am not arguing whether or not the US government has the right to ban TikTok, I am explaining what the threats are. Do not conflate the two and confuse the conversation. It is absolutely possible that this is a threat and we can…

> Bytedance was ordered to suspend its most popular product, a news-aggregator app called Jinri Toutiao (Today’s Headlines). The next day, regulators yanked Neihan Duanzi, the company’s social-media platform, where users share jokes and videos. If ByteDance really was an extension of the state, surely they wouldn't even have launched a product that violates the regulations of the state they're supposedly an extension…

Post by JanSt » Sat, Aug 01, 2020, 2:25 PM UTC

dsabanin wrote: post #437

allendoerfer wrote: post #428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I consider it much more questionable to exert power over allied countries to stop extraterritorial infrastructure projects (i.e. Nordstream 2) Nordstream 2 is a great example. Sanctioning a country that was literally the wall between you and the East is such an extremely stupid move. Just confirms Merkels sentence: "Europe can not rely on the US any longer". German here and I have to, say: You lost me there, buddy.…

Putin is going to use NordStream to exert pressure on Germany. There’s no doubt about it. They use gas pipelines as a pressure point with Ukraine and Belarus all the time.

Post by mdorazio » Sat, Aug 01, 2020, 2:26 PM UTC

dreamcompiler wrote: post #530

How long would it take for a US company to create a TikTok clone? Are there any moats here? Any IP or other barriers to entry?

Post by x86_64Ubuntu » Sat, Aug 01, 2020, 2:27 PM UTC

CydeWeys wrote: post #502

Al-Khwarizmi wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree it's unfair, but when you defend something for moral reasons or claim to have a moral high ground, you should stick with it even if it's unfair, right? The West has always said that the Chinese bans to Western social media and tech companies were authoritarian and antidemocratic. How is this less so?

This gets right to the heart of the paradox of tolerance. When your country is tolerant of other countries' companies operating locally, but they aren't tolerant of the same, then you're going to eventually be overrun. You cannot defeat the intolerant through blanket tolerance; consequences and retaliation are necessary. To make it even simpler, tit-for-tat is a good strategy for iterated prisoner's dilemma; always c…

Post by TeMPOraL » Sat, Aug 01, 2020, 2:29 PM UTC

eru wrote: post #491

goatinaboat wrote: post #480

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you restrict what your customers (ie citizens) can do, just because some despotic regime somewhere abuses their citizens? One reason Chinese products are cheaper is that they largely ignore environmental concerns. So by allowing the trade all we do is put our own, well-regulated factories out of business, whilst increasing the net pollution in the world, and instead of quality products that last we get junk…

> So by allowing the trade all we do is put our own, well-regulated factories out of business Do you have any evidence for that? I doubt it. > and instead of quality products that last we get junk destined for landfill, [...] That seems like a decision for customers to make? If customers prefer cheaper products, who are we to judge? > And that's before you even get into the slave labour... I don't think that's a big…