Supreme Court rules TikTok can be banned
- Thread starter JournalBot
- Start date
Upvote
14
(15
/
-1)
42% is still higher than 2016 which was 39% per your source. 2020 was just a very unique year.
Upvote
31
(34
/
-3)
Indeed this would seem to be to China’s advantage if the goal is in fact to influence Americans. To radicalize not just the youth but a wider, dissatisfied, base of users who at this point already hate the USA.
Edit: And for good reason. Fuck this kakistocracy.
Upvote
-6
(8
/
-14)
Serious question: Not a TikTok user here, but can anyone summarize for me what the actual effect of this "magic algorithm" sauce they have is? I mean what is actually better about TikTok's algorithm that can't be explained by:
1) having a different cadre of content creators on the platform vs others (younger folks never on FB so not on IG?)
2) being first mover in the space and thus seizing the network effect (platform focused on short-form video to the exclusion of other social media stuff, everyone else was tacked on or terrible)
3) marketing (fun, simple, quick, youthful, etc)
4) dedicated, built-in tools and effects for producing content that surpassed other platforms
What is actually better about "the algorithm" that couldn't be replicated if ownership changed from ByteDance to Random-US-Company, but the users, platform, tools, and install base all stayed the same?
Upvote
22
(22
/
0)
Wait wait, so there isn't a ceasefire deal reached under the current administration, or does that not count?
Upvote
9
(19
/
-10)
Nice precedent, so now europe can ban X for the exact same reasons of influence risks by a foreign country.
Upvote
49
(53
/
-4)
Notably, it doesn't matter who owns your data because they can just buy it anyway.
China accessing your data directly isn't materially different from buying it from American data brokers. The (presumed) lack of Chinese data brokers actually adds privacy from an government* that is openly hostile to minorities that a growing number of younger people consider themselves part of now that being LGBT+ is socially acceptable to them.
*edit: the incoming government specifically
Last edited:
Upvote
8
(20
/
-12)
It rings a bit hollow knowing that foreign actors run the same operations on other platforms. Sure, they don't have direct access to the app or algorithm, but that's just a few stock buys and board members away.
If the issue really is
Upvote
8
(16
/
-8)
It focuses in on what you seem to enjoy watching, and does it very well.
It doesn't push content you don't care about.
It moderates hate speech.
That's pretty much it.
Upvote
30
(37
/
-7)
No they did this so that the data doesn't leave the US sphere of influence. It's the same like the "safe haven" laws in the EU where the EU mandates that cloud providers offering services to European customers have to ensure that the data never leaves the EU. The law also didn't force a sale to my knowledge it just forced the company to create a US branch independent of the rest.
It is also not a Democrat ploy because this was a bipartisan effort also backed by the GOP and the first Trump administration so you can argue that it has majority support of the US citizenry.
Complex criminal/civil cases take years. Tht isn't a new development. The current leadership of the DoJ surely didn't help but the investigative and prosecution team was working on the case for the majority of the last 4 years. They weren't just waiting until now to kick it off. The slow walking argument is just silly.
The ACA is a reasonably first step to get to a public healthcare system in an environment where the biggest political donors are vehemently opposed to any change in the way the US healthcare system works. It's also a reasonably first step if you look at how public healthcare works in e.g. most of Europe where the government mostly mandates what is covered under insurance and that cost of treatments/medication is fixed but where the day to day business is still being run by insurances and not directly by the government.
When two of the biggest and most influential jewish PACs threaten to primary - hell even successfully primary - any Democrat that speaks out in favour of Gaza and Palestine and when Jewish American voters make up a significant number of your traditional voting base you can't really afford to take a definitive stance on Palestine. I mean you definitely can but then you lose for a different reason.
Upvote
19
(38
/
-19)
The issue is foreign influence. We want our foreign influence, and the Russian’s at this point, but not China’s foreign influence.
Upvote
1
(12
/
-11)
US court rulings do not form precedents in the EU and EU constitutional rights, laws, directives and courts are very different from the US.
Upvote
40
(43
/
-3)
BlueScreen? Was this named by someone who's never touched/seen/heard of computers for the last three decades?
Upvote
15
(19
/
-4)
I would believe any of the lawmakers, politicians, and judges who have pushed this care about national security if they actually pushed for security. They couldn't even be bothered to fund replacing Chinese routers after writing a law for it.
Everyone is just moving to the next Chinese app that wasn't banned.
The law should of been found unconstitutional on multiple grounds.
We should be very worried about how much our freedoms are be carved away for "our own good"
Upvote
-13
(13
/
-26)
Sure, but privacy protections are quite orthogonal to foreign influence. Those dirty Europeans with their dirty healthcare don't need my personal data to influence me.
Upvote
14
(15
/
-1)
Not really.
Going by what you experience on TikTok if you don't heavily curate your content feed I'd say it's exactly the opposite
Upvote
16
(19
/
-3)
100% agree we need regulation on tracking & information gathering from social media, but can you seriously say that Tiktok isn't a huge potential threat to national security? It's controlled, in the end, by the same government that is also actively black-hat hacking governments and corporations world-wide. Tiktok itself may be fully innocent and just trying to make a buck exploiting kids (as usual for corporations) but its final board of directors is basically the CCP.
Note that the EU is going after Twitter for exactly this question -- do the twitter content boosting algorithms boost one specific political party in Germany vs. another.
Upvote
14
(22
/
-8)
Tbh it's a pretty good joke of how unreliable tech companies are these days.
Upvote
4
(4
/
0)
Of course they can. That's what sovereignty means. Of course, then you can get in to retaliation, trade wars, etc. which means that countries don't take steps like this lightly.
Upvote
23
(23
/
0)
The ACA had to meet the 60-vote threshold in the Senate (and did, exactly). There weren't 60 votes to create a completely public healthcare system.
As someone who relied on the healthcare exchanges it created for years, I would've loved the ACA to include more robust public health options, but I also followed the discussion and debate quite closely. The Democrats did not have 60 votes in the Senate for a full public option. And with the ACA unable to attract a single GOP vote, they had no alternatives.
There was a time when the most liberal Republican was more liberal than the most conservative Democrat. Back then, you might have found a Republican or three who was sympathetic to the idea of a robust, full-coverage public healthcare system. That opportunity did not exist and it was the most conservative Democrats who dictated the final shape of the ACA.
Upvote
77
(78
/
-1)
If you work in PR or marketing, and you fail to convince your audience, it's not your audience's fault, it's yours.
People are people, and hinging your strategy on there being a better class of people is going to fail.
The problem, for the Democrats--for neoliberal parties the world over--is that they spend an awful lot of time threading the proverbial needle, trying to please everyone, which results in disappointing everyone equally. That's a losing strategy.
Upvote
29
(35
/
-6)
The difference is that Trump hadn't made friends with a particular TikTok investor until last year.
Upvote
36
(36
/
0)
It has the support of most national level politicians. I don't think it's reasonable to assume they're representing the interests of their constituents on a regular basis.
Upvote
16
(17
/
-1)
Yes, in the sense that it's not anywhere near as bad as Facebook has been in terms of national security, as we're now almost handing ourselves to Russia.
Precision-targeting the social media app used the most by younger users protesting the existing system protects against a different sort of "national security" than what people here seem to be thinking of...
Upvote
9
(11
/
-2)
US shares intelligence with Europe. If China agreed to something similar, TikTok may have continued.
Upvote
1
(5
/
-4)
The GOP's economic policies are empirically worse and have been for decades. Their marketing is better on the economy, but their actual actions are far, far worse.
Upvote
60
(62
/
-2)
All this reminds me of The Peripheral, a book/tv series where China had so far surpassed the rest of the world that they were literally able to invent a form of time travel. While Americans were busy having VR sex and collapsing what little economy remained, the Chinese were manipulating timelines to advance themselves way past the singularity and into the post-scarcity society that Star Trek only dreamed of.
Seems to me like we should be focusing on the big picture instead of squabbling amongst ourselves, but, alas...
Seems to me like we should be focusing on the big picture instead of squabbling amongst ourselves, but, alas...
Upvote
-15
(4
/
-19)
Well given that people keep voting for them over basically any other more progressive or younger candidate I'd say it is reasonable to assume.
Upvote
-16
(4
/
-20)
One thing we're seeing Trump do--very effectively--is bully Senators and House reps into doing what he wants by appealing to the public because Trump understands who he needs to appeal to.
I mean, they're getting Hegseth approved. Fucking Hegseth. And it's because they're scared of Trump and his followers primary'ing them out.
The Democrats spend so much time in a terminally-DC-brained state, convinced of the importance of favour-trading, that they don't seem to realize how much that kind of favour trading disappoints the people who vote Democrat. There's a reason why the few Ds that have uniquely high approval ratings are the ones that engage with their base, much to the annoyance of the DNC.
Upvote
49
(53
/
-4)
American owners are in fact allowed to influence Americans. Free speech. The CCP, not so much.
Upvote
5
(16
/
-11)
Where did this "magic algorithm" come from anyway (assuming it's actually something special)? Some mathematician deep in the bowels of TikTok? Some "foreign" funded military program? Some US University's federally funded project?
If it's such a marvelous propaganda "weapon" why can't some US based social network (FaceTube/whatever) get the US government to write/create them the equivalent? (Our tax dollars at work!)
Just wondering....
If it's such a marvelous propaganda "weapon" why can't some US based social network (FaceTube/whatever) get the US government to write/create them the equivalent? (Our tax dollars at work!)
Just wondering....
Upvote
-11
(3
/
-14)
No, young people -- and, in fact, MOST people -- aren't interested in politics; they're interested in politicians.
All that really matters in politics in policy, and the average person -- including the ones who claim to be politically knowledgable -- know little to nothing about policy and its effects. And if they did, they'd be more active at the local level than the national level, since those are the things that actually and demonstrably affect us the most.
The average voter (particularly the young ones) can't name their own representatives in Congress, let alone their local assemplyperson or city councilperson. Pretending otherwise is ridiculous.
Upvote
15
(17
/
-2)
There's a game theory aspect to this. This is liberals in "punish mode" right now.
Effectively, if Democrats are aware that you "have" to vote for them in 100% of cases because they're less bad, why would they even begin to attempt to represent you in favor of donators?
How do you fix that as a voter? Keep voting for them? Keep telling them that not representing you is great and they should keep doing that? Try and out-lobby all the superPACs?
They won't take anyone seriously if their votes aren't actually threatened. And this time it reached enough of a critical mass for that threat to matter.
Upvote
-5
(18
/
-23)
If the world shares intelligence with the US the MAGA's complain they're being replaced by intelligent people with a different skin color.
Upvote
-1
(3
/
-4)