The whole "Fix all of our internal problems before worrying about external problems" thing is always so weird to me.
That's not how our government works! Everyone here knows that's not how our government works! A significant portion of congress not only doesn't want to fix all of our internal problems, they are actively doing everything they can to make them worse.
It's not an either/or proposition. We don't get to choose to solve all societal ills or crack down on a hostile foreign power spying on us. We have a Congress that agrees on basically nothing ever, and they finally agreed on fixing a few things related to foreign policy. There was no option on the table this week to fix our education system! I would fucking love to fix our education system, but the whole "we should do absolutely nothing until we fix the biggest, much more divisive, issues that plague us" is just not it. It's not how any Democracy I'm aware of has ever worked! You fix what you can, and what there is consensus to fix. You try really hard to restructure the composition of the government to fix the other issues to solve the issues you want solved where there is not consensus, but we can't snap recall all of Congress today and the results wouldn't get us to perfect societal Utopia or anything slightly resembling that if we could.
We're not even talking about greater societal issues as a whole. We're mostly talking about just... social media's problems with algorithm manipulation, data security, privacy, etc, which all need to be solved, and that this tiktok bill doesn't begin to address in a meaningful way.
Edit: to be clear, these are things tiktok is absolutely guilty of too. But so are Meta, and Twitter, and Netflix, and tons of other companies. And nailing Tiktok to the wall without addressing any of the actual ways this stuff happens is basically treating one small symptom and totally ignoring the cause.
TikTok has all the same problems of other social media. The bill does not address those things.
TikTok has the unique problem of being controlled by the Chinese government and used as an outlet for propoganda and intelligence gathering. This bill addresses that.
This bill not doing things that are outside the scope of this bill is not a reason this bill is bad as it is not intended or addressing those things outside of its scope.
Being able to generate propaganda isn’t the only benefit from running the platform.
Scraping user data and tweaking what is and isn’t shown (and in what ratios for things on the margins) matters a ton too.
Also in particular having access to private messages seems like it would be pretty handy for targeting and blackmailing basically anyone. You know from the international intelligence outposts China has been caught using to harass and target dissidents or insufficiently loyal citizens outside China.
I mean here's some summary about TikTok and Chinese intelligence
China is demonstrating a higher degree of sophistication in its influence activity, including
experimenting with generative AI. TikTok accounts run by a PRC propaganda arm reportedly
targeted candidates from both political parties during the U.S. midterm election cycle in 2022.
"China is investing an enormous amount of money in the full spectrum of state propaganda, of which this is an important part," said Graham Brookie, senior director of the Atlantic Council's Digital Forensic Research Lab. Social media is "an important layer because it creates a façade of engagement on their chosen narratives...that are either beneficial to the [Chinese Communist Party] or harmful to its perceived competitors."
This is a good example of why it doesn't matter if TikTok is sold.
They're running and creating accounts to spread their propaganda which they can do with any social media site whether they control it or not.
Russia didn't need to own Facebook or Twitter to use them to influence elections.
Some real “knives are deadly too, so why shouldn’t we just let children have guns in schools?” energy here.
Can bad actors spread propaganda on other social media sites? Sure, they can and do.
Is that even easier when you have direct control of the algorithm and unfettered access to piles of user data? I have to think it’s yes. That they could use another platform for propaganda doesn’t mean we allow them to continue running their own.
I mean here's some summary about TikTok and Chinese intelligence
China is demonstrating a higher degree of sophistication in its influence activity, including
experimenting with generative AI. TikTok accounts run by a PRC propaganda arm reportedly
targeted candidates from both political parties during the U.S. midterm election cycle in 2022.
"China is investing an enormous amount of money in the full spectrum of state propaganda, of which this is an important part," said Graham Brookie, senior director of the Atlantic Council's Digital Forensic Research Lab. Social media is "an important layer because it creates a façade of engagement on their chosen narratives...that are either beneficial to the [Chinese Communist Party] or harmful to its perceived competitors."
This is a good example of why it doesn't matter if TikTok is sold.
They're running and creating accounts to spread their propaganda which they can do with any social media site whether they control it or not.
Russia didn't need to own Facebook or Twitter to use them to influence elections.
Some real “knives are deadly too, so why shouldn’t we just let children have guns in schools?” energy here.
Can bad actors spread propaganda on other social media sites? Sure, they can and do.
Is that even easier when you have direct control of the algorithm and unfettered access to piles of user data? I have to think it’s yes. That they could use another platform for propaganda doesn’t mean we allow them to continue running their own.
The general consensus is that Russia seemed to sure do a lot of damage on a good ol American owned platform yeah? Guns and knives or whatever idk that's a pretty tortured analogy but if election integrity is something we're worried about this isn't going to do anything about it.
I think electricitylikes me hit the nail on the head with the "definitely not a friend" comment. Its a US centric, from the position of what benefits the US and some of us, probably a tiny minority are not US citizens and have in fact historically suffered from the US imperialism than at the hands of China. So the framing of China as terrible for spying on US citizens, while the US spies on everyone else rings hollow to me, but I see how it might feel very personal for someone who is used to being on the other end of business.
Would much rather see the US clean its own house than dive into this new cold war that is only going to exacerbate so many problems here.
When someone's coming in and shitting on the carpet, it makes sense to lock the front door even if you're a messy fucker too.
This targeted bill means we're less likely to get real reform over how social media companies operate as an industry.
No it doesn't. People aren't any less mad at them.
I think electricitylikes me hit the nail on the head with the "definitely not a friend" comment. Its a US centric, from the position of what benefits the US and some of us, probably a tiny minority are not US citizens and have in fact historically suffered from the US imperialism than at the hands of China. So the framing of China as terrible for spying on US citizens, while the US spies on everyone else rings hollow to me, but I see how it might feel very personal for someone who is used to being on the other end of business.
Would much rather see the US clean its own house than dive into this new cold war that is only going to exacerbate so many problems here.
When someone's coming in and shitting on the carpet, it makes sense to lock the front door even if you're a messy fucker too.
This targeted bill means we're less likely to get real reform over how social media companies operate as an industry.
No it doesn't. People aren't any less mad at them.
It means that all the people who might back media reform because fuck tiktok/china but don't give a shit about Meta, of which there are no small number, have no buy in.
Yeah this bill is mostly good. Ukraine and Taiwan funding. $9b for Gaza. Israel gets some money but that's the trade-off. It's better than the previous agreement that negotiated immigration concessions.
And it has the potential to set Chinese intelligence and data collection / propoganda efforts back pretty significantly.
Seems like a win mostly all around.
Pretty sure they'll just buy it from other companies and it will change nothing except make people mad they tried to ban TikTok.
Another victory for capitalism.
Any chance at contributing to the thread? Or do you just want to bitch in the most vague way possible?
+10
Options
minor incidentexpert in a dying fieldnjRegistered Userregular
Yeah this bill is mostly good. Ukraine and Taiwan funding. $9b for Gaza. Israel gets some money but that's the trade-off. It's better than the previous agreement that negotiated immigration concessions.
And it has the potential to set Chinese intelligence and data collection / propoganda efforts back pretty significantly.
Seems like a win mostly all around.
Pretty sure they'll just buy it from other companies and it will change nothing except make people mad they tried to ban TikTok.
Another victory for capitalism.
Any chance at contributing to the thread? Or do you just want to bitch in the most vague way possible?
This is a good example of an entirely different criticism. Criticism of the MIC is criticism of a warmongering structure outside the realm of civilian control.
I'm not sure how you came away with any of what I said as a defense of the Chinese government. Responding to posts about ownership and control structures with "china isnt the glorious counterweight" isnt a debate, its an exercise in shoddy ideological flexing. People in this thread have routinely over stated the control the CCP has over international operations. The evidence for thus control as presented has been weak. People have barreled along anyway treating it like an arm of Chinese intelligence.
The flat refusal to draw any distinction between the Chinese government and like any structure in China is weird. Lots of American companies work hand in glove with the US government and we don't talk about them this way.
Anyway, this bill isn't the US taking any kind of stand on the Chinese government's moral failures.
I didn't quote anyone and call them a liar and the quote chain i responded to didn’t either so I'm not sure why you felt that was directed at you in particular.
I didn't say it was?
Please can you point out where the US Government owns controlling interest in private companies? Sits on boards?
The US is not a semi-planned economy. US companies working with the USG is not the same as the CCP/Chinese government either owning, controlling, or overseeing corporations with the ability to dismantle or change a corporate direction as seen fit for the protection the CCP's power.
Youre overstating the control over international operations, but youre considering the point too narrowly anyway. The US system doesn't require direct ownership to maintain its relationships with businesses. Plenty of kinds of control.
People here pretty frequently end of describing Chinese society as a monolith under the CCP and its just reactionary nationalism.
The difference in control of major corporations between the two countries is huge.
Is China a single monolith? Of course not, its the most populated country in the world. It of course has a diversity in culture and personality. In fact with the reaction to the COVID 0 policy we saw some of the first true major protest against the CCP in a generation.
At the same time I think you are understating/estimating the amount of control China has over its population verse a country like the US. China and the CCP control the information systems and social media in a way that isn't possible in the US or most other countries on account of it be an authoritarian oligarchy. The very big thing around the whole Great Wall with the internet. Massive censorship of the major social media sites in China such as Weibo. The ability for China to remove individuals at will from corporations. Massive amounts of censorship and control over TV, streaming, movies, and books. All news is via state approved sources outside of HK which are now watched over like a hawk.
China and the CCP are not good guys. They do all they can to maintain power and control over society. And on top of that they do all they can to reinforce the superior position of Han Chinese throughout the country while enforcing the racist views on cultural built out of Stalinism. On top of the ongoing cultural and actual genocides in Tibet and Xinjiang including mass replacements with Han Chinese.
China the people? Not a monolith but also since China is not a democracy the people themselves are neither are in control or are a major voice in the decision making either.
The basis of the CCP now is a reaction to Tienanmen. That system has been exploited by Xi and his cronies to allow him to be a dictator for life if he wants. And basis of that include strict controls and oversight on the population in a very dystopian cyberpunk way. I mean the fact there are "social credit scores" should tell you how the country functions and views its population as needing to be controlled.
You can call be a reactive nationalist. But I have spent a lot of time on studying China. Its not a glorious counter weight American hegemony.
I'm not sure how you came away with any of what I said as a defense of the Chinese government. Responding to posts about ownership and control structures with "china isnt the glorious counterweight" isnt a debate, its an exercise in shoddy ideological flexing. People in this thread have routinely over stated the control the CCP has over international operations. The evidence for thus control as presented has been weak. People have barreled along anyway treating it like an arm of Chinese intelligence.
Well if anyone knows a thing or two about shoddy ideological flexing.
Anyway, your arguments often come off as a defense of the Chinese government because you keep saying things that give the Chinese government the benefit of the doubt in a way you never seem to for any Western country, and especially not the US. Like, I don't know how else to simplify it.
I'd also like you to clarify how you think the argument for control thus far presented has been weak. There seems to have been a fair bit of evidence to suggest that directly and indirectly. If anyone is barreling along, it's you barreling forward with your handwaving away of any argument for why the Chinese government is perceived as hostile and a threat, and any evidence to suggest the depth of their hand in how TikTok is run and the data it collects.
Most of the direct evidence of control is over how the company operates domestically, which is notably different than its international operation both in structure and results. People have been sloppy about this distinction. This is not about giving anyone the benefit of the doubt, its about recognizing what claims the evidence will support and which it will not.
The general consensus is that Russia seemed to sure do a lot of damage on a good ol American owned platform yeah? Guns and knives or whatever idk that's a pretty tortured analogy but if election integrity is something we're worried about this isn't going to do anything about it.
You can 100% disagree with what sammich is arguing, but it seems like a really weird tack to try to misrepresent it as if they're being vague or "not contributing to the thread".
Ah, it stinks, it sucks, it's anthropologically unjust
Being able to generate propaganda isn’t the only benefit from running the platform.
Scraping user data and tweaking what is and isn’t shown (and in what ratios for things on the margins) matters a ton too.
Because the Fediverse is so open for interoperability, China has already been caught scraping Fediverse servers, especially targeting LGBTQ+ focused ones.
I'm OK with Styrofoam letting off some steam in this thread. There's obviously a personal element to this
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
I'm OK with Styrofoam letting off some steam in this thread. There's obviously a personal element to this
I don't actually use tiktok much at all. I have an account for work stuff but day to day on it is below my pay grade. But I do a lot of political activism and I know where the young people are at.
The flat refusal to draw any distinction between the Chinese government and like any structure in China is weird. Lots of American companies work hand in glove with the US government and we don't talk about them this way.
Anyway, this bill isn't the US taking any kind of stand on the Chinese government's moral failures.
I didn't quote anyone and call them a liar and the quote chain i responded to didn’t either so I'm not sure why you felt that was directed at you in particular.
I didn't say it was?
Please can you point out where the US Government owns controlling interest in private companies? Sits on boards?
The US is not a semi-planned economy. US companies working with the USG is not the same as the CCP/Chinese government either owning, controlling, or overseeing corporations with the ability to dismantle or change a corporate direction as seen fit for the protection the CCP's power.
Youre overstating the control over international operations, but youre considering the point too narrowly anyway. The US system doesn't require direct ownership to maintain its relationships with businesses. Plenty of kinds of control.
People here pretty frequently end of describing Chinese society as a monolith under the CCP and its just reactionary nationalism.
The difference in control of major corporations between the two countries is huge.
Is China a single monolith? Of course not, its the most populated country in the world. It of course has a diversity in culture and personality. In fact with the reaction to the COVID 0 policy we saw some of the first true major protest against the CCP in a generation.
At the same time I think you are understating/estimating the amount of control China has over its population verse a country like the US. China and the CCP control the information systems and social media in a way that isn't possible in the US or most other countries on account of it be an authoritarian oligarchy. The very big thing around the whole Great Wall with the internet. Massive censorship of the major social media sites in China such as Weibo. The ability for China to remove individuals at will from corporations. Massive amounts of censorship and control over TV, streaming, movies, and books. All news is via state approved sources outside of HK which are now watched over like a hawk.
China and the CCP are not good guys. They do all they can to maintain power and control over society. And on top of that they do all they can to reinforce the superior position of Han Chinese throughout the country while enforcing the racist views on cultural built out of Stalinism. On top of the ongoing cultural and actual genocides in Tibet and Xinjiang including mass replacements with Han Chinese.
China the people? Not a monolith but also since China is not a democracy the people themselves are neither are in control or are a major voice in the decision making either.
The basis of the CCP now is a reaction to Tienanmen. That system has been exploited by Xi and his cronies to allow him to be a dictator for life if he wants. And basis of that include strict controls and oversight on the population in a very dystopian cyberpunk way. I mean the fact there are "social credit scores" should tell you how the country functions and views its population as needing to be controlled.
You can call be a reactive nationalist. But I have spent a lot of time on studying China. Its not a glorious counter weight American hegemony.
I'm not sure how you came away with any of what I said as a defense of the Chinese government. Responding to posts about ownership and control structures with "china isnt the glorious counterweight" isnt a debate, its an exercise in shoddy ideological flexing. People in this thread have routinely over stated the control the CCP has over international operations. The evidence for thus control as presented has been weak. People have barreled along anyway treating it like an arm of Chinese intelligence.
Well if anyone knows a thing or two about shoddy ideological flexing.
Anyway, your arguments often come off as a defense of the Chinese government because you keep saying things that give the Chinese government the benefit of the doubt in a way you never seem to for any Western country, and especially not the US. Like, I don't know how else to simplify it.
I'd also like you to clarify how you think the argument for control thus far presented has been weak. There seems to have been a fair bit of evidence to suggest that directly and indirectly. If anyone is barreling along, it's you barreling forward with your handwaving away of any argument for why the Chinese government is perceived as hostile and a threat, and any evidence to suggest the depth of their hand in how TikTok is run and the data it collects.
Most of the direct evidence of control is over how the company operates domestically, which is notably different than its international operation both in structure and results. People have been sloppy about this distinction. This is not about giving anyone the benefit of the doubt, its about recognizing what claims the evidence will support and which it will not.
You've been shown that the Chinese military is the party that caused the huge Equifax breach in 2017. I provided numerous examples of China downplaying their genocide and other crimes via the TikTok algorithm. People aren't being sloppy, you are just ignoring the evidence.
For fucks sake, you even say "most of the direct evidence of control is over how the company acts domestically", which indicates that you are aware that some of the evidence is from how they act internationally.
The flat refusal to draw any distinction between the Chinese government and like any structure in China is weird. Lots of American companies work hand in glove with the US government and we don't talk about them this way.
Anyway, this bill isn't the US taking any kind of stand on the Chinese government's moral failures.
I didn't quote anyone and call them a liar and the quote chain i responded to didn’t either so I'm not sure why you felt that was directed at you in particular.
I didn't say it was?
Please can you point out where the US Government owns controlling interest in private companies? Sits on boards?
The US is not a semi-planned economy. US companies working with the USG is not the same as the CCP/Chinese government either owning, controlling, or overseeing corporations with the ability to dismantle or change a corporate direction as seen fit for the protection the CCP's power.
Youre overstating the control over international operations, but youre considering the point too narrowly anyway. The US system doesn't require direct ownership to maintain its relationships with businesses. Plenty of kinds of control.
People here pretty frequently end of describing Chinese society as a monolith under the CCP and its just reactionary nationalism.
The difference in control of major corporations between the two countries is huge.
Is China a single monolith? Of course not, its the most populated country in the world. It of course has a diversity in culture and personality. In fact with the reaction to the COVID 0 policy we saw some of the first true major protest against the CCP in a generation.
At the same time I think you are understating/estimating the amount of control China has over its population verse a country like the US. China and the CCP control the information systems and social media in a way that isn't possible in the US or most other countries on account of it be an authoritarian oligarchy. The very big thing around the whole Great Wall with the internet. Massive censorship of the major social media sites in China such as Weibo. The ability for China to remove individuals at will from corporations. Massive amounts of censorship and control over TV, streaming, movies, and books. All news is via state approved sources outside of HK which are now watched over like a hawk.
China and the CCP are not good guys. They do all they can to maintain power and control over society. And on top of that they do all they can to reinforce the superior position of Han Chinese throughout the country while enforcing the racist views on cultural built out of Stalinism. On top of the ongoing cultural and actual genocides in Tibet and Xinjiang including mass replacements with Han Chinese.
China the people? Not a monolith but also since China is not a democracy the people themselves are neither are in control or are a major voice in the decision making either.
The basis of the CCP now is a reaction to Tienanmen. That system has been exploited by Xi and his cronies to allow him to be a dictator for life if he wants. And basis of that include strict controls and oversight on the population in a very dystopian cyberpunk way. I mean the fact there are "social credit scores" should tell you how the country functions and views its population as needing to be controlled.
You can call be a reactive nationalist. But I have spent a lot of time on studying China. Its not a glorious counter weight American hegemony.
I'm not sure how you came away with any of what I said as a defense of the Chinese government. Responding to posts about ownership and control structures with "china isnt the glorious counterweight" isnt a debate, its an exercise in shoddy ideological flexing. People in this thread have routinely over stated the control the CCP has over international operations. The evidence for thus control as presented has been weak. People have barreled along anyway treating it like an arm of Chinese intelligence.
Well if anyone knows a thing or two about shoddy ideological flexing.
Anyway, your arguments often come off as a defense of the Chinese government because you keep saying things that give the Chinese government the benefit of the doubt in a way you never seem to for any Western country, and especially not the US. Like, I don't know how else to simplify it.
I'd also like you to clarify how you think the argument for control thus far presented has been weak. There seems to have been a fair bit of evidence to suggest that directly and indirectly. If anyone is barreling along, it's you barreling forward with your handwaving away of any argument for why the Chinese government is perceived as hostile and a threat, and any evidence to suggest the depth of their hand in how TikTok is run and the data it collects.
Most of the direct evidence of control is over how the company operates domestically, which is notably different than its international operation both in structure and results. People have been sloppy about this distinction. This is not about giving anyone the benefit of the doubt, its about recognizing what claims the evidence will support and which it will not.
You've been shown that the Chinese military is the party that caused the huge Equifax breach in 2017. I provided numerous examples of China downplaying their genocide and other crimes via the TikTok algorithm. People aren't being sloppy, you are just ignoring the evidence.
For fucks sake, you even say "most of the direct evidence of control is over how the company acts domestically", which indicates that you are aware that some of the evidence is from how they act internationally.
Why are we bringing the PLA and Equifax into this?
I think electricitylikes me hit the nail on the head with the "definitely not a friend" comment. Its a US centric, from the position of what benefits the US and some of us, probably a tiny minority are not US citizens and have in fact historically suffered from the US imperialism than at the hands of China. So the framing of China as terrible for spying on US citizens, while the US spies on everyone else rings hollow to me, but I see how it might feel very personal for someone who is used to being on the other end of business.
Would much rather see the US clean its own house than dive into this new cold war that is only going to exacerbate so many problems here.
When someone's coming in and shitting on the carpet, it makes sense to lock the front door even if you're a messy fucker too.
This targeted bill means we're less likely to get real reform over how social media companies operate as an industry.
Less likely? Could you please explain how so? Because it is my opinion that if we never take the first step on the journey, we'll never arrive at the destination. If we can't start with the lowest of low hanging fruit of social media bad actors, then what makes you think that Facebook/Meta, Google/Alphabet, Reddit, or any of the others will be taken to task.
I can't promise that if action is taken against TikTok that it will lead to actions taken to curb the others. But I feel pretty certain that if no action is ever taken, then no action will ever be taken. Shooting down an improvement just because it doesn't fix everything just means we end up not fixing anything.
I think electricitylikes me hit the nail on the head with the "definitely not a friend" comment. Its a US centric, from the position of what benefits the US and some of us, probably a tiny minority are not US citizens and have in fact historically suffered from the US imperialism than at the hands of China. So the framing of China as terrible for spying on US citizens, while the US spies on everyone else rings hollow to me, but I see how it might feel very personal for someone who is used to being on the other end of business.
Would much rather see the US clean its own house than dive into this new cold war that is only going to exacerbate so many problems here.
When someone's coming in and shitting on the carpet, it makes sense to lock the front door even if you're a messy fucker too.
This targeted bill means we're less likely to get real reform over how social media companies operate as an industry.
Less likely? Could you please explain how so? Because it is my opinion that if we never take the first step on the journey, we'll never arrive at the destination. If we can't start with the lowest of low hanging fruit of social media bad actors, then what makes you think that Facebook/Meta, Google/Alphabet, Reddit, or any of the others will be taken to task.
I can't promise that if action is taken against TikTok that it will lead to actions taken to curb the others. But I feel pretty certain that if no action is ever taken, then no action will ever be taken. Shooting down an improvement just because it doesn't fix everything just means we end up not fixing anything.
But that's the point. The government isn't taking action against TikTok because of the algorithm they're doing it because it's owned by a Chinese company.
I'm not sure how you came away with any of what I said as a defense of the Chinese government. Responding to posts about ownership and control structures with "china isnt the glorious counterweight" isnt a debate, its an exercise in shoddy ideological flexing. People in this thread have routinely over stated the control the CCP has over international operations. The evidence for thus control as presented has been weak. People have barreled along anyway treating it like an arm of Chinese intelligence.
The CCP has directly been engaged with exactly this kind of activity. Studies have shown that the TikTok algorithm is drastically less likely to make recommendations that the CCP doesn't like, such as Tibet, Hong Kong Protests, Uyghur, and other topics. Tipping the scales and keeping genocide out of public consciousness are how governments are able to get away with such genocide in the first place.
Yeah this bill is mostly good. Ukraine and Taiwan funding. $9b for Gaza. Israel gets some money but that's the trade-off. It's better than the previous agreement that negotiated immigration concessions.
And it has the potential to set Chinese intelligence and data collection / propoganda efforts back pretty significantly.
Seems like a win mostly all around.
Pretty sure they'll just buy it from other companies and it will change nothing except make people mad they tried to ban TikTok.
Another victory for capitalism.
Any chance at contributing to the thread? Or do you just want to bitch in the most vague way possible?
This is a good example of an entirely different criticism. Criticism of the MIC is criticism of a warmongering structure outside the realm of civilian control.
I'm not sure how you came away with any of what I said as a defense of the Chinese government. Responding to posts about ownership and control structures with "china isnt the glorious counterweight" isnt a debate, its an exercise in shoddy ideological flexing. People in this thread have routinely over stated the control the CCP has over international operations. The evidence for thus control as presented has been weak. People have barreled along anyway treating it like an arm of Chinese intelligence.
The flat refusal to draw any distinction between the Chinese government and like any structure in China is weird. Lots of American companies work hand in glove with the US government and we don't talk about them this way.
Anyway, this bill isn't the US taking any kind of stand on the Chinese government's moral failures.
I didn't quote anyone and call them a liar and the quote chain i responded to didn’t either so I'm not sure why you felt that was directed at you in particular.
I didn't say it was?
Please can you point out where the US Government owns controlling interest in private companies? Sits on boards?
The US is not a semi-planned economy. US companies working with the USG is not the same as the CCP/Chinese government either owning, controlling, or overseeing corporations with the ability to dismantle or change a corporate direction as seen fit for the protection the CCP's power.
Youre overstating the control over international operations, but youre considering the point too narrowly anyway. The US system doesn't require direct ownership to maintain its relationships with businesses. Plenty of kinds of control.
People here pretty frequently end of describing Chinese society as a monolith under the CCP and its just reactionary nationalism.
The difference in control of major corporations between the two countries is huge.
Is China a single monolith? Of course not, its the most populated country in the world. It of course has a diversity in culture and personality. In fact with the reaction to the COVID 0 policy we saw some of the first true major protest against the CCP in a generation.
At the same time I think you are understating/estimating the amount of control China has over its population verse a country like the US. China and the CCP control the information systems and social media in a way that isn't possible in the US or most other countries on account of it be an authoritarian oligarchy. The very big thing around the whole Great Wall with the internet. Massive censorship of the major social media sites in China such as Weibo. The ability for China to remove individuals at will from corporations. Massive amounts of censorship and control over TV, streaming, movies, and books. All news is via state approved sources outside of HK which are now watched over like a hawk.
China and the CCP are not good guys. They do all they can to maintain power and control over society. And on top of that they do all they can to reinforce the superior position of Han Chinese throughout the country while enforcing the racist views on cultural built out of Stalinism. On top of the ongoing cultural and actual genocides in Tibet and Xinjiang including mass replacements with Han Chinese.
China the people? Not a monolith but also since China is not a democracy the people themselves are neither are in control or are a major voice in the decision making either.
The basis of the CCP now is a reaction to Tienanmen. That system has been exploited by Xi and his cronies to allow him to be a dictator for life if he wants. And basis of that include strict controls and oversight on the population in a very dystopian cyberpunk way. I mean the fact there are "social credit scores" should tell you how the country functions and views its population as needing to be controlled.
You can call be a reactive nationalist. But I have spent a lot of time on studying China. Its not a glorious counter weight American hegemony.
I'm not sure how you came away with any of what I said as a defense of the Chinese government. Responding to posts about ownership and control structures with "china isnt the glorious counterweight" isnt a debate, its an exercise in shoddy ideological flexing. People in this thread have routinely over stated the control the CCP has over international operations. The evidence for thus control as presented has been weak. People have barreled along anyway treating it like an arm of Chinese intelligence.
Well if anyone knows a thing or two about shoddy ideological flexing.
Anyway, your arguments often come off as a defense of the Chinese government because you keep saying things that give the Chinese government the benefit of the doubt in a way you never seem to for any Western country, and especially not the US. Like, I don't know how else to simplify it.
I'd also like you to clarify how you think the argument for control thus far presented has been weak. There seems to have been a fair bit of evidence to suggest that directly and indirectly. If anyone is barreling along, it's you barreling forward with your handwaving away of any argument for why the Chinese government is perceived as hostile and a threat, and any evidence to suggest the depth of their hand in how TikTok is run and the data it collects.
Most of the direct evidence of control is over how the company operates domestically, which is notably different than its international operation both in structure and results. People have been sloppy about this distinction. This is not about giving anyone the benefit of the doubt, its about recognizing what claims the evidence will support and which it will not.
The general consensus is that Russia seemed to sure do a lot of damage on a good ol American owned platform yeah? Guns and knives or whatever idk that's a pretty tortured analogy but if election integrity is something we're worried about this isn't going to do anything about it.
You can 100% disagree with what sammich is arguing, but it seems like a really weird tack to try to misrepresent it as if they're being vague or "not contributing to the thread".
Styro has a long history of of making open ended statements with an obviously intended interpretation, but enough wiggle room to allow him to move the goalposts when someone calls him out on what he's saying. For example, from the quotes, he claims that the evidence of CCP influence over TikTok is weak without explaining how or why it's weak. He wants to "see the US clean its own house..." which is just whataboutism. His statement about getting some reform being a barrier to future reform is an argument against incremental improvements and a misconstruing of the specific issues, like CCP influence, that make TikTok unique. Pointing out that Russia was able to influence the US elections via Facebook in 2016 is again just whataboutism, because it doesn't absolve the CCP of doing the same thing nor the fact that they are demonstrably using TikTok to drive the messaging the CCP wants.
When I said international operations did you think I meant like....international Chinese operations? Because that was about tiktok, which is operated internationally. I'm still pretty confused on why you're bring the PLA into this conversation. The PLA is not relevant here.
Styrofoam Sammich on
+1
Options
JacobkoshGamble a stamp.I can show you how to be a real man!Moderatormod
Yeah this bill is mostly good. Ukraine and Taiwan funding. $9b for Gaza. Israel gets some money but that's the trade-off. It's better than the previous agreement that negotiated immigration concessions.
And it has the potential to set Chinese intelligence and data collection / propoganda efforts back pretty significantly.
Seems like a win mostly all around.
Pretty sure they'll just buy it from other companies and it will change nothing except make people mad they tried to ban TikTok.
Another victory for capitalism.
Any chance at contributing to the thread? Or do you just want to bitch in the most vague way possible?
This is super not how we post, dude. You're not a mod and if you don't like someone's contributions you're not required to engage.
+1
Options
JacobkoshGamble a stamp.I can show you how to be a real man!Moderatormod
There are several reports from this thread but I'm supposed to be in bed right now and I think chu is out of it too. I'm locking it until one of us can give it our full attention.
I wasn't 'out of it', I was 'resting from my many labors' (ie, poopsocking New Vegas).
I've read all the reports and would like the following to stop:
-please knock off the indulgent little burns about Sinophobia. Remember that you're not actually here roasting the flag-waving dorks at home. You're talking to other real people in the room who are spending time to think and talk about the issues. If someone is genuinely doing some gross ass Yellow Peril shit, I will keep an eye out and squash that. But it's massively unhealthy to see glib, self-satisfied cHInA BAd I GuESs posts. If you think there's a meaningful double standard being espoused in the thread, address that. Don't leverage serious concerns (racism, nationalism, global exceptionalism) to try and dismiss and dunk-smear all the people who disagree with you.
-we absolutely need to stop this public running score of how people post. If someone is using their posts to construct an elaborate acrostic about how they hate bisexual people, that's a good thing to note and share with staff. But 'you're a bad thinker and I want you and everyone reading to know I'm keeping track' is extraordinarily unwanted as some public exercise in hard-hitting expose.
To be honest a major concern I have is that while people here talk about the issues with Chinese propaganda and all that, a vocal part of the American government does not necessarily seem particularly concerned about that. Or at least, the largest issues that they've talked about has not been the propaganda that you or I might be concerned about, but rather accusations levied at regular content, especially recently content that is critical of Israel. When it comes to government the reasons for taking actions matters, and it's hard to feel relaxed about the reasons the government has talked about.
I cannot see into the hearts and minds of hundreds of congresscritters, and even if I could it doesn't really matter. The motivation for legislation is far less important the results.
This will cut an arm off of the Chinese propaganda machine whether or not a vocal part of the American government cares that it does.
BSoB on
+16
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
To be frank, I don't think anyone in government actually cares about criticism of Israel on social media, beyond trying to eliminate the parts that are genuinely antisemitic.
"Leopards won't eat my face" is a hell of a statement when your argument isn't "it's absolutely not a propaganda and influence arm of the Chinese government".
If the latter is true, then the former doesn't matter. But if you're not rebuking the latter, then an argument of "oh this is only being done because domestic political issue" is exactly the former. True and honest news about your own country, curated and managed for you by company in an authoritarian country well known for high-level overlap of government and business.
To be honest a major concern I have is that while people here talk about the issues with Chinese propaganda and all that, a vocal part of the American government does not necessarily seem particularly concerned about that. Or at least, the largest issues that they've talked about has not been the propaganda that you or I might be concerned about, but rather accusations levied at regular content, especially recently content that is critical of Israel. When it comes to government the reasons for taking actions matters, and it's hard to feel relaxed about the reasons the government has talked about.
I've seen it mostly the opposite. It seems like a lot of congress came out of classified briefings on TikTik expressing serious concerns. Even the people who still didn't want to support the legislation. The Chinese control issue seemed a lot more salient to most of congress and the "they are warping children's minds with anti-Israel propaganda" seems like it's mostly coming from far-right idiots in the Republican party.
A ton of the republican backers in Congress talk explicitly about sticking it to Palestinain supporters and The Gays, and a lot of pro Israeli lobby groups are on record on the first point as well. They get what they want if this holds up in court. it's only a fringe position in that the fringe is GOP mainstream.
To be honest a major concern I have is that while people here talk about the issues with Chinese propaganda and all that, a vocal part of the American government does not necessarily seem particularly concerned about that. Or at least, the largest issues that they've talked about has not been the propaganda that you or I might be concerned about, but rather accusations levied at regular content, especially recently content that is critical of Israel. When it comes to government the reasons for taking actions matters, and it's hard to feel relaxed about the reasons the government has talked about.
I've seen it mostly the opposite. It seems like a lot of congress came out of classified briefings on TikTik expressing serious concerns. Even the people who still didn't want to support the legislation. The Chinese control issue seemed a lot more salient to most of congress and the "they are warping children's minds with anti-Israel propaganda" seems like it's mostly coming from far-right idiots in the Republican party.
If they dont voice those concerns publicly, and why dont they, should we care?
If China is a grave threat, why not tell us the threat behind TikTok? Behind the ban?
I see it as a tit for tat economic/tech industry fight, because that's what makes sense and looks obvious. US based social media didnt made inroads by cooperation, so the US government is turning to protectionism.
To be honest a major concern I have is that while people here talk about the issues with Chinese propaganda and all that, a vocal part of the American government does not necessarily seem particularly concerned about that. Or at least, the largest issues that they've talked about has not been the propaganda that you or I might be concerned about, but rather accusations levied at regular content, especially recently content that is critical of Israel. When it comes to government the reasons for taking actions matters, and it's hard to feel relaxed about the reasons the government has talked about.
I've seen it mostly the opposite. It seems like a lot of congress came out of classified briefings on TikTik expressing serious concerns. Even the people who still didn't want to support the legislation. The Chinese control issue seemed a lot more salient to most of congress and the "they are warping children's minds with anti-Israel propaganda" seems like it's mostly coming from far-right idiots in the Republican party.
While she hasn’t specifically mentioned TikTok in her bizarre tirades, Nancy Pelosi has repeatedly accused the anti-Genocide movement of being manipulated by China and Russia
Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has drawn criticism for suggesting that some pro-Palestinian activism in the U.S. is part of a foreign influence operation.
On Sunday, the Democratic representative from California said she would like the FBI to investigate potential Russian connections and funding behind American calls for an armistice in the Israel-Hamas war.
Responding to a question on CNN’s State of the Union about growing anger among Democrats, particularly young people and Arab Americans, at the Biden administration’s handling of the conflict, Pelosi said: “What we have to do is try to stop the suffering in Gaza … But for them to call for a ceasefire is Mr. Putin’s message.”
Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi., D-Calif., was blasted on social media after a video surfaced from October in which she told pro-Palestinian protesters from Code Pink to "go back to China" where their "headquarters is".
"In October, Pelosi told our members calling for a ceasefire to ‘go back to China,’ Code Pink posted on X on Monday along with a video of Pelosi interacting with protesters.
"These same women have been protesting for peace at her house for 17 years. Pelosi takes thousands of dollars from AIPAC every year. Who’s the foreign agent here?"
Like, it’s not exactly subtle here, especially when you pair that with other on-record-in-major-press-outlet sources that talk about “yeah the major turning point for support of the bill in Congress was all the people supporting Palestinians and viewing Israel negatively,” which were cited repeatedly in the previous thread.
multiple examples, including ones from this past week:
They began talking with other Republican lawmakers and aides across several committees about a new bill. By August, they had decided to shepherd a potential bill through a House committee focused on China, the Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party, led by Representatives Mike Gallagher, a Wisconsin Republican and its chairman, and Raja Krishnamoorthi, an Illinois Democrat.
The bipartisan committee swiftly embraced the effort. “What we recognized was that there were so many different approaches and the technical issues were so complex,” Mr. Krishnamoorthi said.
So the committee hatched a strategy: Win the support of Democrats, the White House and the Justice Department for a new bill.
Its efforts got a lift after lawmakers including Mr. Gallagher accused TikTok of intentionally pushing pro-Palestinian and anti-Israel content to its users last year. Mr. Krishnamoorthi and others said the Israel-Gaza conflict stoked lawmakers’ appetites to regulate the app.
To date, there is no public evidence that this has happened, though it is a concern that has long been expressed by TikTok’s detractors.
The most recent evidence for this, detractors claim, is the imbalance between the number of pro-Palestinian videos and pro-Israel videos on the app since the Oct. 7 Hamas attacks on Israeli civilians. But that imbalance is consistent with what polling has shown about young people’s opinions of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and is consistent with the imbalance seen on U.S.-owned sites Facebook and Instagram. Young Americans have consistently shown support for Palestinians, according to Pew Research surveys, including in one poll issued in 2014, four years before TikTok launched in the United States. On Facebook, the #freepalestine hashtag was found on more than 11 million posts — 39 times more than those with #standwithisrael. On Instagram, the primary pro-Palestinian hashtag is found on 6 million posts, 26 times more than the primary pro-Israel hashtag, according to previous reporting by The Post.
Experts also question the validity of judging content by hashtags, noting that many users add a hashtag in hopes of drawing interest to their video, not necessarily as an expression of which side they favor. TikTok also asserts that Oracle, a U.S. company based in Texas, reviews any changes to the algorithm.
Krishnamoorthi and Rep. Mike Gallagher (R-Wis.), leaders of the select committee on China, had previously introduced another bill targeting TikTok that was stymied amid constitutional concerns. The Commerce panel greenlit the bill led by Gallagher and Krishnamoorthi 50-0 last week, advancing it just two days after its introduction, an unheard-of pace for legislation targeting tech companies.
Other members, including Krishnamoorthi and fellow Democrat Jared Moskowitz (Fla.), said the platform’s role in online discussions over the Hamas attack on Israel helped galvanize support. “After October 7, we watched all the misinformation be spread around,” Moskowitz said.
Lawmakers have accused the platform of fueling anti-Israeli sentiment. A Washington Post report last year found that hashtags associated with both pro-Israeli and pro-Palestinian sentiment are often used to criticize those movements, while TikTok’s opaque algorithms and metrics make determining the magnitude of activity difficult.
Still, TikTok’s opponents hadn’t relented. Jacob Helberg, a member of a congressional research and advisory panel called the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, has been working on building a bipartisan, bicoastal alliance of China hawks, united in part by their desire to ban TikTok. Over the past year, he says, he has met with more than 100 members of Congress, and brought up TikTok with all of them.
Some lawmakers built momentum for the bill by holding hearings to introduce their colleagues to arguments against TikTok, Helberg said. He also co-hosted a hearing that focused in part on TikTok.
It was slow going until Oct. 7. The attack that day in Israel by Hamas and the ensuing conflict in Gaza became a turning point in the push against TikTok, Helberg said. People who historically hadn’t taken a position on TikTok became concerned with how Israel was portrayed in the videos and what they saw as an increase in antisemitic content posted to the app.
Anthony Goldbloom, a San Francisco-based data scientist and tech executive, started analyzing data TikTok published in its dashboard for ad buyers showing the number of times users watched videos with certain hashtags. He found far more views for videos with pro-Palestinian hashtags than those with pro-Israel hashtags. While the ratio fluctuated, he found that at times it ran 69 to 1 in favor of videos with pro-Palestinian hashtags.
…
Goldbloom, who has advocated a ban or sale of TikTok, posted about his findings on X, gaining widespread attention. Nikki Haley cited the analysis in a Republican presidential primary debate. Goldbloom heard from the office of Rep. Mike Gallagher (R., Wis.).
Gallagher heads a House committee focused on China, and the concerns about Israel-Hamas videos on TikTok spurred him and other committee members to renew their attempts to force a sale or ban.
+4
Options
ButtersA glass of some milksRegistered Userregular
A ton of the republican backers in Congress talk explicitly about sticking it to Palestinain supporters and The Gays, and a lot of pro Israeli lobby groups are on record on the first point as well. They get what they want if this holds up in court. it's only a fringe position in that the fringe is GOP mainstream.
They also say their tax cuts will pay for themselves and grow the economy. You're welcome to make the case against the bill based on its contents or even its cosigners, but the actual words of proven liars is not a strong basis for a rebuttal.
A ton of the republican backers in Congress talk explicitly about sticking it to Palestinain supporters and The Gays, and a lot of pro Israeli lobby groups are on record on the first point as well. They get what they want if this holds up in court. it's only a fringe position in that the fringe is GOP mainstream.
They also say their tax cuts will pay for themselves and grow the economy. You're welcome to make the case against the bill based on its contents or even its cosigners, but the actual words of proven liars is not a strong basis for a rebuttal.
The GOP, while consummate liars, aren’t liars in the sense of being one of the members of the mythical guard duo of a dungeon where one only tells lies and the other only the truth.
They typically lie about economic issues because the intent is to get people to willingly go along with exploiting themselves for the wealth class that makes up the GOP’s sociopolitical power structure.
They typically tell the truth about how the thing they want to do will harm minorities because they are bigots who openly court people who also want to join them in harming minorities.
The only time they lie about hurting minorities is when they say “this won’t hurt them!” Because they still want to hurt minorities, and expect they can get the gullible to believe them that they are not drawing them into complicity in that harm.
There’s no logic behind saying “we back this bill because it harms groups we historically hate and want to see socially disempowered” while not actually wanting those groups disempowered. There’s no societal gain on their part by lying that they’re being motivated by naked bigotry. Typically if you’re going to lie, you want to lie about the thing that gives you cultural cache (in this case, that would be the paranoid ranting about the threat of Chinese Commie brainwashing of our vulnerable public consensus)
They also say their tax cuts will pay for themselves and grow the economy. You're welcome to make the case against the bill based on its contents or even its cosigners, but the actual words of proven liars is not a strong basis for a rebuttal.
Nah, pretty comfortable saying killing the youth activism platform will have a negative impact on youth activism. What are they going to do? Go back to Twitter where "cis" gets your posts deprioritized? Support the bill if you want, no point in acting like it doesn't have costs.
Describing TikTok as "the youth activism platform" when it has the same issues that twitter and facebook has of shoveling fascist/misogynist/bigoted content into the faces of the youth as hard as it possibly can is so wild that I don't even know where to start.
Describing TikTok as "the youth activism platform" when it has the same issues that twitter and facebook has of shoveling fascist/misogynist/bigoted content into the faces of the youth as hard as it possibly can is so wild that I don't even know where to start.
A social media network can, in fact, be multiple things, because it is like any other network of massed human interaction: a contradictory mix of cultures, motivations and goals.
It’s like saying we have to raze an entire town, if not a whole state, to the ground because it has shitty reactionary movements in its borders, regardless of, you know, the normal and progressive people who also live there and would rather you not destroy their home because that to you is the simplest and most efficient way to solve the reactionaries problem.
Describing TikTok as "the youth activism platform" when it has the same issues that twitter and facebook has of shoveling fascist/misogynist/bigoted content into the faces of the youth as hard as it possibly can is so wild that I don't even know where to start.
Your feed is curated by what you watch. So if somebody uses it for youth activism that's what they see. The algorithm is what is considered bad, but it's not throwing pro-fascist stuff on everybody's feed unless you're engaging with it in the first place by searching for it.
Just like how I don't see that kind of shit on twitter because I only follow people I like and consider good.
Posts
TikTok has all the same problems of other social media. The bill does not address those things.
TikTok has the unique problem of being controlled by the Chinese government and used as an outlet for propoganda and intelligence gathering. This bill addresses that.
This bill not doing things that are outside the scope of this bill is not a reason this bill is bad as it is not intended or addressing those things outside of its scope.
Scraping user data and tweaking what is and isn’t shown (and in what ratios for things on the margins) matters a ton too.
Also in particular having access to private messages seems like it would be pretty handy for targeting and blackmailing basically anyone. You know from the international intelligence outposts China has been caught using to harass and target dissidents or insufficiently loyal citizens outside China.
For those that think CCP doesn't exert control (not that anything is likely to change their mind since it's ideological)
What's the ideology
Some real “knives are deadly too, so why shouldn’t we just let children have guns in schools?” energy here.
Can bad actors spread propaganda on other social media sites? Sure, they can and do.
Is that even easier when you have direct control of the algorithm and unfettered access to piles of user data? I have to think it’s yes. That they could use another platform for propaganda doesn’t mean we allow them to continue running their own.
The general consensus is that Russia seemed to sure do a lot of damage on a good ol American owned platform yeah? Guns and knives or whatever idk that's a pretty tortured analogy but if election integrity is something we're worried about this isn't going to do anything about it.
No it doesn't. People aren't any less mad at them.
It means that all the people who might back media reform because fuck tiktok/china but don't give a shit about Meta, of which there are no small number, have no buy in.
Any chance at contributing to the thread? Or do you just want to bitch in the most vague way possible?
You can 100% disagree with what sammich is arguing, but it seems like a really weird tack to try to misrepresent it as if they're being vague or "not contributing to the thread".
Because the Fediverse is so open for interoperability, China has already been caught scraping Fediverse servers, especially targeting LGBTQ+ focused ones.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
I don't actually use tiktok much at all. I have an account for work stuff but day to day on it is below my pay grade. But I do a lot of political activism and I know where the young people are at.
You've been shown that the Chinese military is the party that caused the huge Equifax breach in 2017. I provided numerous examples of China downplaying their genocide and other crimes via the TikTok algorithm. People aren't being sloppy, you are just ignoring the evidence.
For fucks sake, you even say "most of the direct evidence of control is over how the company acts domestically", which indicates that you are aware that some of the evidence is from how they act internationally.
Why are we bringing the PLA and Equifax into this?
Less likely? Could you please explain how so? Because it is my opinion that if we never take the first step on the journey, we'll never arrive at the destination. If we can't start with the lowest of low hanging fruit of social media bad actors, then what makes you think that Facebook/Meta, Google/Alphabet, Reddit, or any of the others will be taken to task.
I can't promise that if action is taken against TikTok that it will lead to actions taken to curb the others. But I feel pretty certain that if no action is ever taken, then no action will ever be taken. Shooting down an improvement just because it doesn't fix everything just means we end up not fixing anything.
But that's the point. The government isn't taking action against TikTok because of the algorithm they're doing it because it's owned by a Chinese company.
{Twitter, Everybody's doing it. }{Writing and Story Blog}
Because you said this:
The CCP has directly been engaged with exactly this kind of activity. Studies have shown that the TikTok algorithm is drastically less likely to make recommendations that the CCP doesn't like, such as Tibet, Hong Kong Protests, Uyghur, and other topics. Tipping the scales and keeping genocide out of public consciousness are how governments are able to get away with such genocide in the first place.
Styro has a long history of of making open ended statements with an obviously intended interpretation, but enough wiggle room to allow him to move the goalposts when someone calls him out on what he's saying. For example, from the quotes, he claims that the evidence of CCP influence over TikTok is weak without explaining how or why it's weak. He wants to "see the US clean its own house..." which is just whataboutism. His statement about getting some reform being a barrier to future reform is an argument against incremental improvements and a misconstruing of the specific issues, like CCP influence, that make TikTok unique. Pointing out that Russia was able to influence the US elections via Facebook in 2016 is again just whataboutism, because it doesn't absolve the CCP of doing the same thing nor the fact that they are demonstrably using TikTok to drive the messaging the CCP wants.
I stand by my previous question/statement.
This is super not how we post, dude. You're not a mod and if you don't like someone's contributions you're not required to engage.
I've read all the reports and would like the following to stop:
-please knock off the indulgent little burns about Sinophobia. Remember that you're not actually here roasting the flag-waving dorks at home. You're talking to other real people in the room who are spending time to think and talk about the issues. If someone is genuinely doing some gross ass Yellow Peril shit, I will keep an eye out and squash that. But it's massively unhealthy to see glib, self-satisfied cHInA BAd I GuESs posts. If you think there's a meaningful double standard being espoused in the thread, address that. Don't leverage serious concerns (racism, nationalism, global exceptionalism) to try and dismiss and dunk-smear all the people who disagree with you.
-we absolutely need to stop this public running score of how people post. If someone is using their posts to construct an elaborate acrostic about how they hate bisexual people, that's a good thing to note and share with staff. But 'you're a bad thinker and I want you and everyone reading to know I'm keeping track' is extraordinarily unwanted as some public exercise in hard-hitting expose.
Maybe the thread will open again tomorrow.
That’s a significantly lower bar than Bill and Ted set for us.
This will cut an arm off of the Chinese propaganda machine whether or not a vocal part of the American government cares that it does.
If the latter is true, then the former doesn't matter. But if you're not rebuking the latter, then an argument of "oh this is only being done because domestic political issue" is exactly the former. True and honest news about your own country, curated and managed for you by company in an authoritarian country well known for high-level overlap of government and business.
I've seen it mostly the opposite. It seems like a lot of congress came out of classified briefings on TikTik expressing serious concerns. Even the people who still didn't want to support the legislation. The Chinese control issue seemed a lot more salient to most of congress and the "they are warping children's minds with anti-Israel propaganda" seems like it's mostly coming from far-right idiots in the Republican party.
If they dont voice those concerns publicly, and why dont they, should we care?
If China is a grave threat, why not tell us the threat behind TikTok? Behind the ban?
I see it as a tit for tat economic/tech industry fight, because that's what makes sense and looks obvious. US based social media didnt made inroads by cooperation, so the US government is turning to protectionism.
While she hasn’t specifically mentioned TikTok in her bizarre tirades, Nancy Pelosi has repeatedly accused the anti-Genocide movement of being manipulated by China and Russia
https://time.com/6589923/nancy-pelosi-pro-palestinian-protests-foreign-influence-russia-china/
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/pelosi-faces-backlash-demanding-swarming-protesters-go-back-china-slanderous
Like, it’s not exactly subtle here, especially when you pair that with other on-record-in-major-press-outlet sources that talk about “yeah the major turning point for support of the bill in Congress was all the people supporting Palestinians and viewing Israel negatively,” which were cited repeatedly in the previous thread.
multiple examples, including ones from this past week:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2024/03/16/tik-tok-debate-claims/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2024/03/13/tiktok-ban-passes-house-vote/
https://www.wsj.com/tech/how-tiktok-was-blindsided-by-a-u-s-bill-that-could-ban-it-7201ac8b
They also say their tax cuts will pay for themselves and grow the economy. You're welcome to make the case against the bill based on its contents or even its cosigners, but the actual words of proven liars is not a strong basis for a rebuttal.
The GOP, while consummate liars, aren’t liars in the sense of being one of the members of the mythical guard duo of a dungeon where one only tells lies and the other only the truth.
They typically lie about economic issues because the intent is to get people to willingly go along with exploiting themselves for the wealth class that makes up the GOP’s sociopolitical power structure.
They typically tell the truth about how the thing they want to do will harm minorities because they are bigots who openly court people who also want to join them in harming minorities.
The only time they lie about hurting minorities is when they say “this won’t hurt them!” Because they still want to hurt minorities, and expect they can get the gullible to believe them that they are not drawing them into complicity in that harm.
There’s no logic behind saying “we back this bill because it harms groups we historically hate and want to see socially disempowered” while not actually wanting those groups disempowered. There’s no societal gain on their part by lying that they’re being motivated by naked bigotry. Typically if you’re going to lie, you want to lie about the thing that gives you cultural cache (in this case, that would be the paranoid ranting about the threat of Chinese Commie brainwashing of our vulnerable public consensus)
Nah, pretty comfortable saying killing the youth activism platform will have a negative impact on youth activism. What are they going to do? Go back to Twitter where "cis" gets your posts deprioritized? Support the bill if you want, no point in acting like it doesn't have costs.
A social media network can, in fact, be multiple things, because it is like any other network of massed human interaction: a contradictory mix of cultures, motivations and goals.
It’s like saying we have to raze an entire town, if not a whole state, to the ground because it has shitty reactionary movements in its borders, regardless of, you know, the normal and progressive people who also live there and would rather you not destroy their home because that to you is the simplest and most efficient way to solve the reactionaries problem.
Your feed is curated by what you watch. So if somebody uses it for youth activism that's what they see. The algorithm is what is considered bad, but it's not throwing pro-fascist stuff on everybody's feed unless you're engaging with it in the first place by searching for it.
Just like how I don't see that kind of shit on twitter because I only follow people I like and consider good.
{Twitter, Everybody's doing it. }{Writing and Story Blog}