721–730 of 769 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not really
Yes, it is. It’s not common to enact laws on the day before one leaves office. Pardons, sure. It’s clearly an attempt to ram it through before the administration changes. Even a year ago they knew there was a good chance of that.
What is the mechanism to avoid this? Beyond using the web version. I'm not keen on the government telling me what apps I can and cannot use. I would like to continue using the app, I don't care about what the law says.
They’re just removing the app from the respective app store. The domain and its underlying IP address aren’t blocked.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You forgot it's mostly about Chinese Communist Party influence (or eventual influence) if they get firmly entrenched in the public mindset of the USA. No nation political apparatus should have such a large direct (actual or potential) influence into the minds of the US public. It's a national security risk of the highest priority. Not every security risk is saber-rattling or direct cybersecurity threats. it's one thi…
> direct injection of said propaganda straight into our toddlers, teens, and tweens brain by that same logic, shouldn't we then ban ig/facebook/threads/twitter/etc.? but since its our propaganda, we can classify as 'news' or some other thing? i very much get what you're saying in principle (re: CCP); however, i don't see the difference in potentially, negatively affecting children's brains. EDIT: corrected word
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Microsoft, Apple, Tesla are doing extremely well in China making hundreds of billions. Tesla even got free land and loans, aka Chinese government subsides. Name a few Chinese tech companies doing the same in the US? Maybe you are suggesting that Chinese should ban Tesla, Apple and Microsoft as well?
Yes, but under China's strict rules about doing business there; government oversight, Chinese senior management, party representative, etc. I mean if Tiktok did the same thing in the US there probably would be less of an issue, but they are unwilling to allow the same restrictions / oversight as the US companies are subjecting themselves to in China.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Joe Biden cannot call up facebook and tell them to show everyone on Instagram ponies tomorrow. However, if Xi Jinping calls up Bytedance and tells them to show everyone ponies tomorrow, your tiktok feed will infact be all ponies tomorrow.
Via various incentives and regulation, they kind of can
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, it is. It’s not common to enact laws on the day before one leaves office. Pardons, sure. It’s clearly an attempt to ram it through before the administration changes. Even a year ago they knew there was a good chance of that.
How is it rammed through?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Ticktock content is curated to fit CCP’s narrative not simply an algorithmic reflection of what its users care about. If you can show evidence of that you should give it to the U.S. government, because it has repeatedly said there is no evidence of such and any threat remains hypothetical.
> If you can show evidence of that you should give it to the U.S. government Tens of millions of teenage Americans are addicted to it is the evidence. Chinese don't allow their kids to waste all day long on stupid douyin, Americans don't have such luxuries, as tons of red necks are going to jump up and label it as anti free speech if you want something similar. As a result, you see Chinese kids spend time on STEM sub…
So it's Chinas fault that the US doesn't have the same laws restricting social media content and screentime for children? Or, if it is the red necks fault, then how does 'TikTok is spreading CCP propaganda' follow from 'US red necks oppose laws that are anti free speech'? It seems you're skipping some steps to get to that conclusion.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why are you changing the subject?
They directly addressed your question.
I asked whether the person I responded to actually have the beliefs they expressed, i.e. that the threat of internal strife in the US is in the future and comes from services like TikTok. Some people say things like that to practice loyalty to the tyranny they suffer under, while other people do it because they believe in it. To clear it up matters, because such reasons indicate whether someone is reachable through reasonable discourse or not.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do you bring up "Fortune 500" CEO:s? They only administrate businesses, they don't own them, unlike oligarchs. When you read that quote, you can't think of anyone that would fit? You don't come to think of the Kochs, Clintons, Trumps, Musks, Obamas, Sacklers, Murdochs, Bidens and so on?
No, and even with those names listed out I don't really understand what category you're pointing at. Your list includes the sitting president and president-elect of the country, who do of course have quite a lot of power. Do I think that TikTok has more power than Rupert Murdoch? Probably not, Murdoch owns a wider variety of media even if he doesn't have any single dominant app. More power than Richard Sackler or Bil…