• daltotron@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Me, laughing as the idiot americans will be banned from the app, and only the pure VPN users will remain:

    No but seriously this is pretty dogshit stupid. The only people happy about this are the omega boomers and pick mes that hated tiktok anyways for what are basically unrelated reasons. Otherwise they’d be equally calling for a larger set of privacy enforcements that encompass all social media sites, which I agree should happen. This seems, to me, to be pretty transparently a protectionist racket. Only we shall control the data of americans, only we shall track them.

    And then there’s also the people saying that any social media getting banned is kind of a net positive. Fuck you mate what the hell? You’re on a pretty explicitly manipulative social media platform right now, it’s just one that you’re able to tailor to your own biases. Probably it’s a net negative to have less propaganda from a variety of sources. Both sides my ass, I guess, fuck your corporate-state disinformation, I got mine.

    I dunno. I watched this guy that makes sandwiches, back when I used tiktok. I thought he was pretty cool. I think it would be a shame to see his content get disappeared, which tiktok already has a pretty huge problem with.

    The benefit of tiktok and short form content is that you can watch it anywhere, and almost anyone with a phone at this point can produce it. Those of you who hate vertical video content should understand that a phone is the optimal platform on which to consume it, and you should probably be happy for that, because it’s not going to outright disappear from the internet otherwise, as we saw before all of this had started. You miss the forest for the trees when you call for heavy-handed outright bans of this stuff. The corporate influence, I can understand getting rid of that, but the platforms themselves, there’s legitimately value there. Twitter as a microblogging platform has been used for actual reporting, and even as it exists now, it’s being used for that. If you were to get rid of youtube, you would be eliminating a frankly staggering amount of information available out there that, sure, might exist in other places, but that both takes a large risk and relies on google MORE to feed you that correctly when you use a search engine, which as we’ve seen recently, hasn’t been the case. You could do the same with reddit. Delete reddit, and you are deleting a metric fuck ton of information on some valuable stuff, you’re deleting a fuck ton of internet culture. These platforms need to be disentangled from their corporate overlords and made more free to own, browse, and use, not outright destroyed.

    • Psychodelic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Leave it to Democrats to do the stupidest thing possible

      We literally never might win like a generation of voters back. Trump had already come out against the bill. Young “rebels” are absolutely going to flock to him thinking Biden is going absolutely nuts with power - since that’s already what they’ve been hearing

      • Cheems@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        GOOD! An 🦅American🦅 company wouldn’t use people’s data for nefarious purposes or sell it to the highest bidder. No sir, not a red blooded American company.

    • dan@upvote.au
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      CCPA (in California) is a good first step. Ideally something similar should be enacted for the entire country.

      • NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Not only that, they want to have a monopoly on on what kind of media content gets delivered to americans.

  • CaptKoala@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    TikTok is the primary source of brain-rot in 2024, please, somebody, change my mind.

  • orcrist@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    What are the odds this stands up in court? It seems like an easy legal victory for TikTok.

    • zaphod@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      On what basis? The legal power of the US government to break up or otherwise force divestment of corporate assets is the basis upon which antitrust law is built. The only way this law could be overturned is it’s found unconstitutional, and if that happens, you can say goodbye to the FTC.

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Lmao. Then bring an anti-trust case? That power is specifically in reference to that and requires the government to prove it’s case in court. Not just make a declaration.

        • zaphod@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          You’re missing my point.

          In the case of antitrust law, the government has to prove its case in court because that’s the way the Sherman Act and related laws are written, not because the constitution necessarily requires it.

          Moreover, TikTok is owned by a Chinese organization. If I’m wrong and the constitution does protect corporations from forced divestment, it wouldn’t apply to TikTok. This is much closer to protectionist trade policy and I’m not aware of any cases where such acts were found to be unconstitutional. For example, Huawei was banned from American markets on national security grounds and while challenged in court, those challenges were defeated.

          To be clear: I am not saying I support this ban one way or the other. I’m saying the belief that this will easily be struck down in court is misguided and that it’s not an obvious slam dunk.

          • Maggoty@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            Huawei was banned from critical infrastructure. You can still buy their products for personal use.

            And the Anti-Trust laws were written that way because that’s the Due Process the Constitution demands. The executive cannot just declare something punitive. That has been the standard for over 200 years.

            Also, if there aren’t rights for foreigners in the US then there aren’t rights for citizens. Because the loss of your rights is always just one declaration away. Which is why rights for everyone inside our borders has been the standard for 70 years.

            • zaphod@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              Huawei was banned from critical infrastructure. You can still buy their products for personal use.

              In what way does that invalidate it as an example?

              The executive cannot just declare something punitive.

              CFIUS and OFAC would beg to differ.

              Also, if there aren’t rights for foreigners in the US then there aren’t rights for citizens. Because the loss of your rights is always just one declaration away. Which is why rights for everyone inside our borders has been the standard for 70 years.

              Bytedance isn’t inside your borders and the constitution doesn’t protect extra-nationals. There’s a reason Guantanamo Bay still exists.

              • Maggoty@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                6 months ago

                You wouldn’t be able to use TikTok as a personal thing. This isn’t critical infrastructure.

                (CFIUS) is a powerful interagency panel that screens foreign transactions with U.S. firms for potential security risks.

                So again. Not personal use. Also, refunding an investment is entirely different than shutting down a business.

                And LMAO. If Bytedance wasn’t inside the borders then this wouldn’t matter. Saying they aren’t inside the borders is possibly the most hilarious bad faith thing I’ve seen in this entire debacle.

                • zaphod@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  6 months ago

                  You wouldn’t be able to use TikTok as a personal thing. This isn’t critical infrastructure.

                  I’m sorry, but this is irrelevant. Look at the list of CFIUS cases. Among them:

                  CFIUS requested that Chinese gaming company Beijing Kunlun Tech Co Ltd. sell Grindr, citing national security concerns regarding a database of user’s location, messages, and HIV status, after the company acquired the gay dating app in 2018 without CFIUS review.

                  Would you agree that Grindr probably doesn’t count as “critical infrastructure”?

                  (BTW, before you mention it, the CFIUS case on that list vis a vis TikTok was reversed by the court because they ruled the executive exceeded the bounds of the IEEPA, not because the IEEPA itself was unconstitutional).

                  (CFIUS) is a powerful interagency panel that screens foreign transactions with U.S. firms for potential security risks.

                  So again. Not personal use.

                  LOL security risks are literally the justification for the bill. The bill even says as much:

                  To protect the national security of the United States from the threat posed by foreign adversary controlled applications, such as TikTok and any successor application or service and any other application or service developed or provided by ByteDance Ltd. or an entity under the control of ByteDance Ltd.

                  So if CFIUS is constitutional, then I fail to see why this law is any different.

                  Look, again, I get it, I think the law is dumb, too.

                  But it is absolutely not a slam dunk that the law will get struck down by the courts, whether you like it or not.

                  The difference between your position and mine is I can acknowledge I may turn out to be wrong.

                  Furthermore, ByteDance absolutely is not operating within US borders. It’s incorporated in China and the Caymans (in the latter case as a variable interest entity so that Americans can buy economic exposure to ByteDance shares that otherwise don’t trade on any US stock exchanges).

                  TikTok, a wholly own subsidiary, is incorporated within the US. A forced divestiture affects the parent company (ByteDance).

                  The real question is whether the ban itself, if divestment doesn’t occur, would be constitutional, given that would affect TikTok Ltd., and that, to me, is unclear, and I expect it’s that portion of the law where TikTok is most likely to succeed in courts.

      • orcrist@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        The question is indeed constitutionality. But I disagree with you about any major effect on the FTC. Details matter, and this looks to be a situation where the details don’t look good for the government. A court could easily find that this was handled improperly, and leave the rest of the framework as it is.

      • DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        On the grounds that they are not breaking it up because it has monopoly but because they don’t like it can be used for Chinese propaganda. Which is limiting speech.

        Also, they require it to be sold to non-chinese buyer, which is discriminatory.

        • ThatWeirdGuy1001@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          Pretty sure it’s because tiktok is literal Chinese Spyware designed to let them listen through any device that has tiktok installed.

          Like I get people are getting pissy about losing a favored social media but let’s not act like it’s not actually a real potential issue.

          • Maggoty@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            Where are you getting that from? Seriously if I saw that from a reputable malware reporter I’d support this in an instant. If this is true please link your source.

          • DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            As opposed to every other social media? If they want to protect privacy, Congress is allowed to pass privacy laws that apply to all companies. They are not allowed to single just one out.

            • ThatWeirdGuy1001@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              6 months ago

              What other social medias are based in countries that want to manipulate American citizens in an attempt to destabilize our democracy?

              • riodoro1@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                6 months ago

                Meta is based in America and it seems that this is the country that wants to destabilize american democracy the most.

                • ThatWeirdGuy1001@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  Yeah I see the irony in my argument.

                  Idk I just don’t see something like that in the hands of an external force that wants to see us fall as a good thing.

                  At least with American companies I can tell myself “well at least they live here so they’re less likely to want to fuck it all up”

                  Like I said I see the irony but still have severe reservations.

              • Sacha@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                6 months ago

                The social media at home (ie Twitter, Facebook, reddit) have been manipulating all citizens into destabilizing democracy with all the right-wing propaganda and it is getting worse every day. I can go to Twitter any day of the week and see some slander in the “What’s hot” section for any democratic/liberal leader while ass licking every conservative one depending on which country you are from. And the posts are mostly made by young Russian/etc bots. The problem is it seems to be working.

                It’s not just tik tok thats used for this shit. But the others are OK because they are 'MURICAN? It’s a double standard. I’m not defending tik tok, but I personally think Twitter, etc need to be sold as well.

                • ThatWeirdGuy1001@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  I agree it’s a double standard.

                  I suppose for me personally it falls into the us us them ideology. I feel better with those companies at least having stake in the country they exist in.

                  Idk the more I think about it the more I realize how naive of a thought that is but I just don’t like the idea of an enemy of the US having that power over US citizens.

        • zaphod@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          See my reply to your sibling comment. This is wishful thinking. You could be right, but it’s just as likely (I’d argue more likely) you’re wrong.

          • DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            Sorry if it sounded like I did not think TikTok is used for espionage. I am sure it is, just like Google, Facebook, etc. are used by the NSA (thanks Snowden for giving us proof of this). Its just funny to me that the US gov has to resort to banning it, because they spent years convincing people Tech Giants spying on them is ok. And now when they say don’t use TikTok, everyone laughs at them.

            • zaphod@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              I couldn’t agree more. IMO the right solution is to regulate data collection, mandate algorithmic transparency, and require opt out for algorithmic curation.

              But the discussion isn’t about whether this is the right remedy (IMO it’s not) but about whether the remedy will be held up by the courts.

              • DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                6 months ago

                Well, I think the courts should strike it down because:

                1. It is content based speech regulation (Chinese influence on people), which deserves strictest scrutiny under the 1st amendment.
                2. It targets TikTok by name, which triggers equal protection issue. Congress is not allowed to pass a law that specifically bans Tom Holland from smoking. Laws need to be general. I don’t see why this would be an exception.
    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Normally yeah but this was a called hit by the wealthy donor class. The same ones giving million dollar vacations to the Supreme Court judges.

  • HexesofVexes@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    I think we’re where China was in 2005–2010: a platform that can (and does) promote values that are against the interests of our nation(s) is popular with our youth. The real dilemma is “can we do better”, and these days it seems not.

    History suggests that the real solution to TikTok isn’t banning it; China trying to block western sites did nothing save foment resentment and foster a VPN industry. Take the next step instead - make something that does TikTok better than TikTok, then push it hard. Either that or do what is being done to YouTube/Google - run it into the ground!

  • Opisek@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Is that picture AI-generated? The article claims it’s from GettyImages and shot on Capitol Hill, but… The signs are too perfect. They all follow the name design, the text in crispy clear, the colours uniform, and the sign itself 1 atom thin.

    • Raiderkev@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Not to take a page out of tin foil hat gangs book, but paid protesters imo. Byte dance probably funded them and had the signs made / distributed amongst them.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Uh yeah, TikTok 100% coordinated those signs. It doesn’t invalidate the protest, many of them use coordinated signs.

  • Etterra@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Bye vertical videos you won’t be missed by anybody with a brain in their head.

    If only. Vertical videos suck and short form sucks harder.

    • RaoulDook@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Yes, you are absolutely correct. Flush that garbage away forever, I say. It’s garbage and turds.

      Tiktok style video selfie mode talking about random bullshit is the worst kind of social media invented yet. Nobody should care what your random face looks like watching some other bullshit on social media. There’s no need for that level of narcissism in society, we have more than enough everywhere else.

      • theotherverion@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Yes, I very much value free market but ethical principles need to be kept. Social media companies, however, fail to follow the basic ethics and disrespect privacy.

    • ours@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Yes US needs privacy laws, not just banning one of the many data-mining social networks.

  • nytrixus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Hindsight is so 20/20 in some comments.

    Guys, stop focusing on the headline. Read the line underneath it. It’s not being banned as in, pushed out of use. It’s being severed from it’s china-based parent company.

    There is such a literacy issue in this country that it’s sad.

  • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    The kids were using the platform to talk about how the boomers got everything wrong, especially Israel, and it threatened their view of themselves.

  • nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Just as a reminder, we have been ‘fighting for 15’ since 2012. But when it comes to leveraging foreign companies with bans to force them to sell to US oligarchs we can move at blazing speed through the least functional congrss in recent history. There are two very different Americas depending on how much money you have.

  • gmtom@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    I probably shouldnt be celebrating this but I am. I fucking despise Tiktok with a passion, I hate its users, its creators, I hate the short form content trend it started and its algorithm based content delivery systems that every other app copied but worse, I hate the sexualisation of minors and peddling that content to pedos, I hate the clout chasing in general, I hate tiktok trends and “challenged”. and I hate the general brainrot it has caused.

    • daltotron@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      I hate the short form content trend it started

      always has been, with vine.

      its algorithm based content delivery systems that every other app copied but worse

      always has been, with twitter, facebook, instagram, snapchat, youtube, uhhhhh… vine, yeah, just mentioned that one. discord, tinder. literally everything.

      I hate the sexualisation of minors and peddling that content to pedos

      Look at what the great adpocalypse of youtube was ostensibly about, then look at what it was really about. In any case, always has been.

      I hate the clout chasing in general

      Always has been.

      I hate tiktok trends and “challenged”

      Assuming you mean “challenge”, you could check out the harlem shake, the ice bucket challenge, god, there’s a lot of them honestly. Gangnam style. I think probably this is just like, meme culture more broadly, which, say it with me now: always has been.

      I hate the general brainrot it has caused.

      And finally, always has been.

    • dan@upvote.au
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      The people that create TikTok content are still going to exist even if TikTok goes away. They’ll just move to another platform.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      I hate its users, its creators, I hate the short form content trend it started and its algorithm based content delivery systems that every other app copied but worse

      I mean… eh? TikTok is hardly the first platform to embrace short-form video. I think the dislike for the app is overblown.

      The style is reflective of the medium. No point in making big budget audio/visual multi-hour immersive experiences for a cell phone screen with some headphones. The media has to be short because its for an audience that’s stealing time in the middle of a commute or during a break at school or the office. The continuous-feed style is something we just managed to achieve with high speed mobile internet (TikTok would have been impossible on a dial-up device).

      Its a young medium. People are still learning what works and what doesn’t. And its as prone to getting enshittified as every other venue, thanks to the endless need for higher profits.

      But as someone who grew up watching Albino Blacksheep and YTMND meme-tier content and owns a DVD of Super Bowl Commercials, I gotta say that we’ve had a lot worse.

      I hate the general brainrot it has caused

      People say this shit about every medium. And there’s definitely awful pieces of individual content.

      But a lot of it just comes down to the hyper-sensationalist marketing. And its common to every conceivable media, from Comic Book style front page of print to the “Bwooooong!” they put in every new movie trailer.

      If TikToks suck, its largely because they’re aping the worst aspects of all the other established media forms.

      • gmtom@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        The media has to be short because its for an audience that’s stealing time in the middle of a commute or during a break at school or the offic

        Except most people you speak to will tell you they spend hours in bed scrolling. Short form took off because it drives higher engagement.

        And its as prone to getting enshittified as every other venue, thanks to the endless need for higher profits.

        Except its never not been shitty. I wa son it back when it was musical.ly it has much of the same problems.

        Albino Blacksheep and YTMND meme-tier content

        Which are far more creative than doing whatever the current trend is, or a thirst trap or click bait.

        People say this shit about every medium. And there’s definitely awful pieces of individual content.

        But with tiktok you can feel it. I hate short form but still end up scrolling mindlessly through YT shorts or IG reels. And it really does measurably affect your attention span. And it’s so noticeable that the user base openly acknowledges the brain rot.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          most people you speak to will tell you they spend hours in bed scrolling

          This seems like an exaggeration on a number of fronts. But even if you can find folks doing this, what’s the counterfactual? Would these same people be out hitting the gym or gardening or curing cancer? Or would they just be watching TV or reading a book, instead?

          Short form took off because it drives higher engagement.

          There are folks binging seasons worth of Netflix who would argue otherwise.

          Which are far more creative than doing whatever the current trend is

          They’re absolutely not. Go back through the dredges of the '00s-era content mill and you’ll find plenty of low-effort crap. Hell, YTMND was the pinacle of low effort crap. It was shit you could crank out in ten minutes with MS Paint and a collection of mp3 snippets.

          And it’s so noticeable that the user base openly acknowledges the brain rot.

          You’d have heard from folks reading tabloid news or watching reality TV decades ago.

          • gmtom@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            Would these same people be out hitting the gym or gardening or curing cancer? Or would they just be watching TV or reading a book, instead?

            I mean ive personally just zoned out scrolling short form and missed my chance to go to the gym before. obviously might not be the case for everyone but is certainly plausible.

            There are folks binging seasons worth of Netflix who would argue otherwise.

            That doesnt disprove what I said at all.

            They’re absolutely not. Go back through the dredges of the '00s-era content mill and you’ll find plenty of low-effort crap.

            Creativity != effort and even then most tiktok stuff is as low effort as it gets.

            • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              6 months ago

              I mean ive personally just zoned out scrolling short form and missed my chance to go to the gym before.

              I’ve seen people scrolling in between reps at the gym. But, again, would this not have been a problem if you’d been blogging instead of TikToking? Or Netflix binging?

              That doesnt disprove what I said at all.

              Multi-hour tv series are not short form.

              Creativity != effort

              A picture of a celebrity attached to a quote from a movie played on a loop is neither.

              • gmtom@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                6 months ago

                I’ve seen people scrolling in between reps at the gym. But, again, would this not have been a problem if you’d been blogging instead of TikToking? Or Netflix binging?

                The point is short form content enables that behaviour more than other things. Its taken off specifically because its addicting and makes you think “its only a short/reel/tiktok just one more… okay one more…etc” that you dont get with hour long netflix episodes.

                Multi-hour tv series are not short form.

                No one is arguing otherwise and long form content just existing doesnt disprove that short form drives higher engagement. Its like saying “Taylor swift songs are the most popular” and replying “but ACDC exists?” That doesnt disprove the original statement.

                A picture of a celebrity attached to a quote from a movie played on a loop is neither.

                ok

                • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  The point is short form content enables that behaviour more than other things. Its taken off specifically because its addicting and makes you think “its only a short/reel/tiktok just one more… okay one more…etc” that you dont get with hour long netflix episodes.

                  I simply haven’t seen anything to support this claim.

                  No one is arguing otherwise and long form content just existing doesnt disprove that short form drives higher engagement

                  You haven’t established anything to disprove. You’ve just asserted it with some personal anecdote about missing a gym appointment.

                  Its like saying “Taylor swift songs are the most popular” and replying “but ACDC exists?”

                  It’s like saying Taylor Swift isn’t inside the top 10 of the Billboard Top 100 so why do you keep insisting that her overwhelming popularity is corrupting America’s fragile young egos?

    • jkrtn@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Yeah but that’s just on YouTube and Facebook now. Nobody is going to regulate them in the slightest.

      It is a slap in the face if they want to say it is too influential to have an adversarial state control it, at the same time leaving it fine for local billionaires to do the exact same things.

    • p5yk0t1km1r4ge@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Me too. I see no issue with banning it. I’ve said this before, but people are only outraged because they’re addicted to it and may possibly lose it. Fuck tik tock. Among your examples, I will add the misinformation pounding left tok with things like autism and other mental disabilities. Plus, the way people are self diagnosing themselves and acting like it’s a fashion statement is outrageous. And then you have the outrage bait videos that explicitly cherry pick information for viewers while holding back the full context of things, which is a tactic there’s already far too much of in this country.

    • Ajen@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      What are you celebrating, exactly? TikTok isn’t going away, it’s just going to be sold to American investors.

      • gmtom@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        At the very least they will have to split tiktok since I doubt the CCP will let them sell the whole thing, nor will they want to.

        Best case scenario they pull out of the US entirely and then maybe some other western countries also ban it.

        • Ajen@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          Some bills don’t have teeth. It sounds like this one does. What do you think would happen if ByteDance doesn’t comply?

          • Chaotic Entropy@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            It would be ineffectually banned in the US and Bytedance would continue to rake in money worldwide from not-the-US?

            The US population represents ~4% of the world.

            • Ajen@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              6 months ago

              You’re saying people in the US would keep using it if it were banned in the US but still available in the rest of the world? How? It wouldn’t be available on app stores, and the website would be blocked by American DNS servers. Most TikTok users aren’t tech savvy enough to get around bans.

              • laughterlaughter@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                6 months ago

                Lol, I don’t agree with what the parent poster said, but your interpretation is way off!

                No, he’s saying that if ByteDance loses the American market, it won’t matter much (it does, in my opinion.)

                • Ajen@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  Lol, I don’t agree with what the parent poster said, but your interpretation is way off!

                  Which part? How do you see things differently?

              • Zink@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                6 months ago

                Just removing it from the Apple App Store world crush its popularity in the US, since iPhones have much more market share here than globally.

                Some users might figure out how to view the site with a web browser, but that’s where the other types of blocks come into play.

  • ceenote@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Not sure if the reason Biden can barely walk is because he’s 1000 or because of all those holes in his foot.

    • ChicoSuave@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Not sure if the reason you can’t leave a coherent comment is because you’re a bot or just as stupid as one.

      • ceenote@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Didn’t realize it was so tough to infer that banning tiktok might upset big parts of Biden’s base, who are already alienated by the Gaza situation, and that I was likening it to shooting oneself in the foot. Sorry.

    • Valmond@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      wHaT aBoUt biDeN?!! gEnOCidE !!1!

      “I’m a russian bot BTW Contakt kremlin@russia.con if I makfunktion”