681–690 of 1001 posts
What's that saying? The best way to get a promotion is to cause a problem and then fix it? Political things aside, it's crazy to see so much of a flip-flop so quickly. Has there been any other behavior like this in the past where a company "shut themselves down" to make a big political statement and then almost immediately undid the shut down?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> flip-flop so quickly The timing and phrasing make it clear that this was planned and negotiated in advance, and the shutdown was just for show in order to be able to post a memo about how "President Trump" saved it. If actual negotiation had to occur, it would not have happened in the twelve hours between midnight and noon on Sunday morning. The point of the stunt was to persuade large numbers of younger folks that…
If that’s the case this was totally bungled, the app was down for less than 12 hours, overnight during a weekend. If they wanted maximum effect Trump wouldn’t have tweeted until 5pm eastern to give people a chance to come to terms with the shutdown actually happening.
BUT, Trump wants Gen Z to like him and that’s all there is to it. So he’s just going to come in on a white horse and “Save TikTok” — handing President Xi a gift on a silver platter. Because he doesn’t actually give a fuck about anything besides being popular.
This satisfies my curiosity about why TikTok didn't try to push app users to the website, which is not so easy to ban. They were always hoping to cozy up to Trump by offering him the opportunity to "save" TikTok. It's only for 90 days though, unless Trump decides to completely ignore his duty to enforce the law (a distinct possibility).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> a company "shut themselves down" to make a big political statement They were following the law. Anything else is just promises by people who are not exactly known for following through with them Shutting down because the law says it, and to prevent really big penalties, is not making “a big political statement
They shut down and reopened without any changes to the law. They are open now, despite the law being in effect.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> a company "shut themselves down" to make a big political statement They were following the law. Anything else is just promises by people who are not exactly known for following through with them Shutting down because the law says it, and to prevent really big penalties, is not making “a big political statement
They shut down and reopened without any changes to the law. They are open now, despite the law being in effect.
The courts on the other hand can permanently block laws.
For the record -- the law for TikTok divestment was not passed on its own, but was instead included in the foreign aid (including Ukraine) package https://edition.cnn.com/2024/04/23/tech/congress-tiktok-ban-... It is not clear if it would have passed if not that procedural trick... So one has to take this into account when considering 'bipartisan support' of the thing.
> but was instead included in the foreign aid (including Ukraine) package I don't know why these kinds of shenanigans are still possible. It makes a complete joke of politics and legislation (and by extension: law). I know I'm shouting at clouds here, and I know the reason is: the sheeple don't care enough to change this thing for the better. But I still feel the need to point it out.
Is anyone aware of any opinion poll among US population about banning tiktok? This to me feels like one of the issues with potentially largest disconnect between voters and politicians Edit: found one from Pew. "The share of Americans who support the U.S. government banning TikTok now stands at 32%." Sept 05, 2024. In contrast, 87% US lawmakers voted for the law that caused this.
I wonder if those numbers would change if people read the same intel reports and knew how far the Chinese spies are up our asses.
What's that saying? The best way to get a promotion is to cause a problem and then fix it? Political things aside, it's crazy to see so much of a flip-flop so quickly. Has there been any other behavior like this in the past where a company "shut themselves down" to make a big political statement and then almost immediately undid the shut down?
OnlyFans did something similar: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OnlyFans#Restrictions_on_porno...
Despite my own feelings on the ban, this kind of royal court politics is the worst potential outcome. Disregarding a law that was passed by a bipartisan majority, signed into law by the president and ruled on by the supreme courts feels like the start of a very dangerous path. Not to mention the prosecutorial discretion may be creating massive liability that the new administration could use to extract favors from som…