TikTok Ban Bill Becomes Law, Gives TikTok 9 Months To Sell

Wilshire@lemmy.world to News@lemmy.world – 590 points –
TikTok Ban Bill Becomes Law, Gives TikTok 9 Months To Sell | Entrepreneur
entrepreneur.com
365

You are viewing a single comment

The company behind tik tok said they will not sell they America is only 20% of their global market. They have refused to give their source code.

So guess app just won't work in US. Dumb ass lawmakers only people this hurt are the US citizens that are using it to make money.

So guess app just won’t work in US

The good ending

Except you can just…VPN to almost any country on the planet

Nobody is gonna use a VPN to get their TikTok fix. They'll use Facebook Reels or YouTube shorts, since most content creators cross-post their stuff there anyway.

Which is the actual intent of attacking a single point of the problem instead of the actual problem of the abuse of end users by all the corpo's social media and other apps., free or otherwise is no longer important.

People on TikTok are already discussing using VPNs, so it will happen if not sold.

And either way, it's almost like congress doesn't care about addictive social media, seeing as it's fine if domestic companies create addictive algorithms. They'll even let foreign governments manipulate the populous via domestic companies, so long as they get a cut of the cash.

I will probably do it. Out of spite. Might even show my Congressional rep at the next town hall meeting.

You need more than a handful of brain cells for that, so it's not exactly the easily manipulated target audience of TikTok.

Passing a law to give the executive branch overreaching censorship authority over the internet while simultaneously campaigning that the other option in the next election wants to use the power of that office to overthrow democracy. This is the “good ending”.

All the folks quoting what a small part of their audience the US is, never mention what percentage of their gross the US is. CCP won't pay for eyeballs in Azerbaijan.

The company behind tik tok said

China. It's China that "said".

I don't see how anyone is hurt by losing access to Tiktok. The only sad part about this is that all social media isn't banned.

You are literally posting this to social media right now. Do you think it would be cool to ban or force a sale of Lemmy to a US corp?

Is Lemmy using a predatory algorithm designed to enrich itself at the expense of the well being of its users and utilize its platform to influence US policy against its own interests? If that answer was yes, then absolutely. With Lemmy being of service to its users without making us its cattle, I'll advocate for it as opposed to against it.

Does congress care about data collection and predatory algorithms, though? If so, why did they just waste their time crafting a targeted bill rather than actually making those practices illegal?

If congress suddenly decided that they didn't like a company for whatever reason, they'll craft another targeted bill like this one. Trump could win this year, do you really want this precedent set right before that?

Luckily, Lemmy is much more difficult due to it's decentralized nature. However, since congress is clearly more than willing to craft targeted bills, it's not out of the question.

Dude, the bill has nothing to do with anything you said. You're criticizing capitalism and the lack of regulations on social media corporations.

My understanding is this bill is about forcing the sale of a company owned by a "foreign adversary" which is vague as shit just like the patriot act, which took (some of) the public 20+ years to realize was probably not a good idea.

Is Lemmy using a predatory algorithm designed to enrich itself at the expense of the well being of its users and utilize its platform to influence US policy against its own interests?

You mean like Facebook? Which isn't being banned?

I love posting how we should ban Facebook, I even post on Facebook about banning Facebook....from the website of course.

Is Lemmy using a predatory algorithm designed to enrich itself at the expense of the well being of its users and utilize its platform to influence US policy against its own interests?

Straight up yes, I'm gonna explain this hot take right now so buckle up.

Lemmy operates on the same basic set of principles that Reddit does. Upvotes send a post up, downvotes send a post down, moderation abilities and succession is controlled by the select few who create a popular channel, and also administrators. Pretty easy, pretty simple so far.

Algorithms don't refer only to implicit incentive structures, but explicit ones, as well. How many posts have you seen on lemmy that are just really stupid propaganda memes? That's what the platform explicitly incentivizes with it's system of upvotes and downvotes. Low rent, low effort posts that vibe with a large majority of the audience are what's going to get more attention and more engagement, and that's going to push a post up, in a kind of feedback loop that hopefully tries to separate the wheat from the chaff. Really, all it does is separate the low rent dopamine content from everything else. I would say the incentivization of low rent behavior by these explicit mechanisms is somewhat predatory, yes.

As to how lemmy is enriched by this process, lemmy gets more attention. so lemmy gets more power inside of the sphere of internet attention, culture, and propaganda. Lemmy as a whole, obviously, which probably ends up meaning the developers. The whole thing being more open source and federated obviously puts this much more into contention than Reddit, sure, but that doesn't really eliminate the basic problems that come about at the very conception of this platform, these problems of echo chambers. You can even see that forming now in a bunch of different instances. You can see that bias in hexbear, ml, world being plagued by a bunch of brainlet neolibs. It's pretty obvious that the system confines everyone to their bubbles.

This is all to basically equivocate any interaction having been had online as being predatory in some way, and as enriching some party. Any mechanism which you use to organize the slew of information coming at you is going to have an inherent set of biases, pros and cons, and is inherently going to prey on some of those biases compared to others. So if we've equivocated all social media with basically all form of social interaction online, then the internet itself was probably a mistake.

Tl;dr IRC is a form of social media. Real life is a form of social media.

You joke but this has a chilling effect on all sm platforms based outside of the US. They just took a massive shit on the 1st amendment.

They just took a massive shit on the 1st amendment.

Oh, so the 1A protects Social Media activity again? When did it change?

It always has, at least from US government. Have you not read the constitution?

It always has, at least from US government. Have you not read the constitution?

Oh, so we can agree that the US Government "asking" Twitter and other media outlets to interfere with the coverage of certain stories is also a 1A violation? Excellent!

I do need to ask your opinion on this Supreme Court case though...

Yes, I would argue it was. Not quite as brazenly but yes.

1st amendment protects citizens, not foreigners.

So everyone on TikTok is a foreigner now?

Banning TikTok, a foreign controlled company, does not infringe on the 1st amendment. Freedom of speech isn't impaired because of some dipshit social media app that actively fucks everyone except the Chinese government over.

I didn't say the bill did.

Either way, TikTok is not the only avenue for the Chinese government to use to fuck us. They'll just find another way, one that isn't so visible and easily regulated. This doesn't really solve much; it's just going to piss people off by taking away their choice and push breaches of personal privacy into the shadows where the US has no jurisdiction.

Except this ban is doing the exact opposite. It's only affecting US citizens. Foreigners are not affected

1 more...

You are on social media. You can leave any time, that was always allowed.

I see nothing wrong with posting to social media to advocate against it, I'll feel free to stay.

Does your posting history bear out that that’s why you’re here, though? 🤷‍♂️ I’m not asking for you to justify it to me, it’s just silly to pretend you’re not participating in something you say should be banned.

My posting history bears out extensive shitposting and calling things as they're seen. I don't take any issue with Lemmy/Fediverse due to how they're decentralized and orchestrated. I'm against predatory algorithms and user manipulation. I believe that the Fediverse itself will be a good thing until it becomes the villain, much like how our utopian social experiments usually go.

1 more...
1 more...