Could they please pull from Europe, too?
If the Chinese government is behind this, it’s a great play. Having Joe Biden be “the guy who banned tik tok” would severely undermine his election chances.
14 year olds don’t vote
Guess we’ll find out whether TikTok or reproductive freedom is more important…
TikTok or reproductive freedom
Both of those bans have happened during the Biden administration
Yes, we all know Biden was super excited about Dobs. -_-
Abortion ban happened because of Trump’s corrupt judges in the supreme court, yeah
14 year olds aren’t the only people who use Tik Tok
Lemmy really seems to generally think that TikTok isn’t massively overall popular. Lemmy would have someone thinking it’s a niche app only being used by teenagers.
They were 14 four years ago
Why would China want Biden to lose?
Removed by mod
Awesome, do META next please!
Never happen, why would the government shut down one of its favorite surveillance tools.
Before X?
X seems to be destroying itself without any external intervention lol
Boy I’d love it if that were really true.
Way way way way too many idiots still going there.
Elon Musk vs. Twitter, lol (timestamped)
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/oK9oPk8bsvk?t=39s
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
There will be a rush of US startups to replace it, and they will all be stage 1 enshittification, so they might actually be good for a while, like TikTok once was.
Or people will just migrate to the YouTube and Insta clones.
Still better than the Chinese propaganda machine
snapchats spotlight will do the best probably in terms of memes
YouTube shorts is such a hellhole that tiktokers migrating to it might improve things.
Good 1 less spyware app
First, negotiations are not yet over, so they’re hoping courts overturn the ban.
Second, TikTok is very popular outside the US too, though 40% of ad revenue is in the US. They’d survive.
Google knew youtube shorts didn’t stand a chance in a fair market.
Even better
If they said or implied anything else, they would lose all leverage. The public couldn’t care less about who owns tiktok, so they need people to think they’ll lose it to have any public support.
It’s Vine time! What? Just… just bring it back. Call it “Kudzu” or some crap if Elon Musk owns the rights to Vine.
I do wonder if this is america being anti communist as history has shown before. Not to say China is actually communist but the economic system is hybrid socialist/capitalist and China is catching up or surpassing america so with this said what’s to say america starts using this tactic against more of chinas Chinese owned exports?
Beyond that america has meta which has done much the same as tiktok, targeting youth, furthering mental health issue, spying, anti trust and coverups yet they get a slap on the wrists.
Anti communist? With everything else we buy from China, this is the tipping point to be anti-communist? How about all the US social media platforms that China won’t let in? Is that “anti-capitalist?”
Um yeah this is cold war type shit. It’s not a “tipping point”, just part of that broader context.
socialism has always been anti capitalism. socialism is based on principles like international revolution and a highly configured economic structures whereas capitalism is extraction of capital which western countries have been doing in china as much as china will allow but this isn’t what i am arguing.
something to keep in mind is that we don’t buy tiktok, similarly to meta and alphabet (google).
brief easy to read history of cold war activity.
Cuba and North Korea (the forgotten war) are both good to look in to. i hope the history can bring context to my previous statement as geopolitics is never as it seems.
While I appreciate the additional info, that really doesn’t add to the conversation about what the tipping point is for the parent comment.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/03/tiktok-bill-foreign-influence/677806/
It’s less about communism and more about authoritarianism. Even historically, communism was (IMO) just the trigger word associated with a slide into authoritarianism … which is what seemingly happened in countries that had a communist uprising to overthrow the government and broader “owning class.”
China seemed like they were on course to be a friendly communist country at one point, but they’ve slid back into authoritarianism under Xi.
I fully expect more hostility towards Chinese exports. Part of the reason for that is going to be that China is happy to use government money to subsidize certain industries to help gain dominance (Sherrod Brown - D Ohio) was recently speaking out about the risk Chinese subsidized EVs pose to the US auto industry domestically and internationally.
communism is not innately authoritarian same with libertarianism and capitalism instead its bad actors that make it so and once bad actors get involved then communism is not meeting its definition. china is a weird one where its communist in name alone with its hybrid economic system and repressive regime which goes against core principles of socialism/communism. i think the death of the USSR which had lead the revolution, as well as the many western embargoes on socialist countries have soured relations.
if your interested in podcasts id like to recommend you listen to blowback as it follows US hostilities against socialism/communism. i believe its on several platforms
A part of me genuinely would like to see communism work.
Another part of my looks at the past century and sees the same pattern of well meaning revolution to communism, that results in a corrupt government that owns and controls everything.
I don’t think the Russian people that got the ball rolling for the USSR were stupid or evil, but I also don’t think it worked out like they wanted… and I think that’s true of every other case of communism that’s been tried in practice.
Part of the problem is without ownership, you don’t own the situation. Which house is taken better care of, the one that’s rented or the one that’s owned?
Another social mind game, are you better off getting into an accident with 1 person around to call for help or 20? It’s been shown that when people can put off responsibility/assume someone else is going to “own” the situation, they do.
I think capitalism with regulation to keep money out of politics, mixed with more social programs (particularly socializing the insurance industry) makes the most sense.
personally, communism in a capitalistic world is very hard.
Cuba wanted to break away from American capitalists and gangsters using Cuba to store money and exploit the Cubans for sugar plantations then the US sets embargoes, Cuba maintains its independence and manages to get its literacy level up to 1953—56% 1970—88% 1986—nearly 100% implemented free social health care with newly built hospitals and students had to work in small towns and villages for part of they’re doctorate. but American meddling was constant with the Cuban missile crises which laughable America clutched they’re purls whilst having setup nukes on the USSR’s doorstep as if that wasn’t threatening.
Cuba has sadly remained under the sanctions and is struggling to stay afloat.
its important to view economics outside of our place of living, while western life is so so although homelessness is forever on the rise but outside of these countries life is different and the people are very much exploited by capitalism whether through ford or amazon, this is why we live the way we do.
I see this as a win win
Call their bluff
they use the same algorithm across all of their companies so selling it would create a strong competitor and the chinese government is likely to block the sale anyways. tiktok revenue is a small slice of bytedance’s income, so it makes sense to swallow the relatively small loss to keep their product intact when it’s crystal clear that it’s far superior to anything else atm.
I love how the media has thrown around the word algorithm. They don’t need to sell their algorithm for a competitor to compete. An algorithm produces some result output. So you could easily clone an algorithm without knowing its exact implementation.
Maybe I know quicksort, but you know mergesort. The customer doesn’t give a fuck which algorithm was used, so long as it’s sorted.
This is a bad take. Yes, “algorithm” is a vague term, but it’s incorrect to suggest that they’re easily cloned. These algorithms are what makes social media companies. Without them, they wouldn’t have the same kind of user engagement. It’s why, outside of the fediverse, social media companies try to hide or demote linear timelines. It’s why they pour most of the R&D money into the recommendation algorithms.
But that’s not really an algorithm.
algorithm is a word employed here to help dumb down the concept of the IP that people will want to buy from tiktok; no one means a literal algorithm.
That was my original point. The media and hence business / management use this term (incorrectly)
They could just say IP, or platform, or service, or implementation. But I guess saying algorithm makes everyone sound smart.
It’s probably not a bluff. They’ve pretty much saturated the U.S. market; there’s not much room left to grow here. It would make more sense to focus their efforts on growing in other regions where they have plenty of headroom to increase their userbase and monetization. Depending on how things play out, they could match their current revenue in a matter of years and still have room left to grow. There’s also the potential to re-enter the U.S. market down the line. Why would they throw that all away and essentially create their own competitor by selling their core technology and diluting/confusing their brand with whatever U.S. company they sell to?
They’ve pretty much saturated the U.S. market; there’s not much room left to grow here
That… doesn’t make sense to me. So because there’s no room to grow, they pull out of the U.S. and lose the likely ~$1 bil spent on digital stickers for live streamers?
I’d think the fact they’ve saturated the US market is exactly why it’d be too valuable to give up. They’d lose a ton of revenue, tanking their valuation. They may be better off selling. From there they could prob just clone it and promote a competing service in those unclaimed markets using a portion of the extra sale price they get for maintaining (and selling a product with) US market dominance
They would say that at this stage. They are still working on getting the law overturned by courts and threat of shutdown mobilizes people against the law in a way that selling it wouldn’t.
When the time comes to shut down they will probably do some paper work fuckery that technically makes it an Irish company but doesn’t change the people in the company.
Another example of the falling US influence.
Exactly. We spent four years playing into their hands, its going to take us decades to recover from that mistake.
Nah, they’ll sell. It would be foolish for them to admit it publicly, that would drive down the price. They’d also lose influence in the American media landscape if they killed TikTok. Finally, they’re fighting this law in the courts, and admitting they’d sell if forced too would be weakening their position. It’s not like selling would really hamper CCP control all that much, they’d just send texts to people’s personal phones when they need something instead of sending official emails.
