• Dupree878@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      14 days ago

      The biggest problem is them doing illegal shit like scanning all your photos instead of just what you pick

        • ECB@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          14 days ago

          It’s less about that and more about stopping an extremely powerful attack vector currently active in your own country.

          Literally the biggest reason why the western world is in such a giant political crisis is the weaponization of social media.

          • Mongostein@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            14 days ago

            100%

            Social media 15 years ago: cat pics and friends.

            Social media today: shit you didn’t subscribe to, but shows up anyway to push wedge issues in to things you enjoy.

            • aquafunkalisticbootywhap@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 days ago

              had youtube open in a new private window on a vpn connection the other day after clicking a link to a video about the new raspberry pi compute module

              was scrolling down thru one of the top comment threads and noticed, sandwiched between relevant tech videos on the right? some talking head, designed to enrage (as opposed to inform) fox news video about nothing related.

              I think Im just done with youtube for the forseeable future. if your profit model requires inducing engagement like that, your product isnt good enough to stand on its own, and/or you’re ok with being shitty to make more money. either way, I want nothing to do with you at that point.

            • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              13 days ago

              Yeah, kinda miss that era. Luckily Lemmy emulates kinda well, just wish that there were more proper old school forums for nich but large communities like NCD or Rimworld.

    • schizo@forum.uncomfortable.business
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      69
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      16 days ago

      Until a flood of TikTok users bankrupt them, anyways.

      Not entirely sure how you’d make the economics of hosting endless video files work without great big piles of money and some way to get even more big piles of money on a routine basis :/

      • Chozo@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        37
        ·
        16 days ago

        Yeah, video hosting is notoriously expensive. It’s why there’s still not a real competitor to YouTube, because nobody else but Google could afford to run the platform at a net loss for the amount of time required to build a profitable user base.

        If even a tiny percentage of TikTok’s US user base decided to move to Loops, that may be enough traffic to not only completely disable Loops, but would probably impact the rest of the Fediverse at large, too.

            • WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              16 days ago

              Yet none of them really paywall you for using an adblocker.

              Actually come to think of it, porn sites are the only place I allow ads (obv blocking the pop ups and other dark pattern fuckery)… probablys because I learned to ignore them entirely as a teen before ad blockers existed.

        • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          16 days ago

          Short videos do not need to be long lived (they could be deleted after 3 days) And some peer to peer could work really good for “viral” videos.

        • can@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          15 days ago

          Interaction with the fediverse is very limited atm

          Edit: and by that I mean non-existent. It’s still very early in development.

        • Telorand@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          16 days ago

          They can. And if at any point it becomes untenable, you can just archive whatever you host, shut down your instance, and put the videos up for download somewhere.

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        15 days ago

        Not entirely sure how you’d make the economics of hosting endless video files work without great big piles of money

        You’re absolutely right, which is why BitTorrent never managed to take off. Totally unviable, doesn’t work at all, and definitely isn’t the technology underpinning federated video services like PeerTube.

        Edit: WTF? Why are you people denying the reality in front of your face? BitTorrent works and distributing video peer-to-peer is a solved problem. I do not understand this defeatist religious insistence that Video Must Cost Money.

        • Alphane Moon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          16 days ago

          At one point BitTorrent/P2P was responsible for something like 30-40% of all global internet traffic.

          The thing is the protocol never really developed beyond some useful, but minor evolutionary updates.

          • grue@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            15 days ago

            You say “never really developed beyond” as if that isn’t a synonym for “finished and working fine.”

  • marrow1@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    14 days ago

    I cannot decide what to support here. On one hand, Tiktok is a blight and a cancer upon the whole world. But on the other hand, I’m kind of a libertarian, anyone should be able to do what they like.

  • Hossenfeffer@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    15 days ago

    Just wait 'til truth.social and xitter run the country. Wouldn’t be surprised if TikTok, Instagram, Facebook, MySpace, WeChat, LinkedIn, Reddit, Pinterest, Discord and Tumblr all get banned.

  • airportline@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    15 days ago

    This is only great news if you are Mark Zuckerberg and you want a near-monopoly on social media.

    • maplebar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      14 days ago

      TikTok could have sold to an American company (read: a company that we can hold legally accountable for bad things that their product does) and made billions of dollars in the process. They chose not to, for some reason, and thus knowingly opted to face a ban in the United States. Those were the options and they knew it.

      As I understand it American companies doing business in China almost always have to go through a Chinese company in order to operate legally and make products available to the Chinese market. Platforms like Facebook are already banned in China and must be accessed through a VPN because they don’t play ball with the Chinese regime, so why should it not be reciprocal?

      Until TikTok is being managed and operated by a company that can be held legally accountable here in America, they are nothing but a security threat and a backdoor for the Chinese government into every cell phone of every person who is dumb enough to install that shit. Is that what the people want to hear? Probably not, but it’s the truth.

      I wouldn’t install TikTok on my phone any sooner than I’d install RedStarOS on my PC, because the implications of using a proprietary, closed source application with ties to the Chinese regime should be fucking obvious to anyone with bare minimum technical knowledge. Likewise, I wouldn’t blame a Chinese person for being skeptical of Microsoft Windows or X.com for their close relationship with the American government. To think otherwise is just not smart.

    • sunbeam60@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      15 days ago

      You are aware that no western social media is allowed in China, are you not?

      • mlg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        15 days ago

        Are you implying we should firewall free internet like china?

        • sunbeam60@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          15 days ago

          No. I’m implying that in general, international trade works by shared openness or shared closeness. If one country or economic region puts an import tax on something, the reciprocal thing is likely to be taxed by the opposite partner.

          I was responding to someone saying “oh this just creates a monopoly for Zucks” when in fact the Chinese social companies have a monopoly in China (an ENORMOUS market) because our products are blocked over there.

          So what we are doing is in line with the norm in international trade.

          • OfficerBribe@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            14 days ago

            Is anyone else besides China doing this? Cannot really call it international norm if 1 country is doing this.

            • sunbeam60@lemmy.one
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              14 days ago

              I don’t think I’ve explained my point very well, or you’ve misunderstood what I’ve said.

              My point is all international relationship is tit for tat. Since China chose to block western social media, it’s not unreasonable for the west to block Chinese social media.

  • mlg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    60
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    15 days ago

    ITT: Braindeads defending government censorship of the internet as if Zuckerberg won’t immediately replace the void with his own platform or by buying out TikTok in a bid.

    Banning one platform would not magically get rid of short attention span and brainrot you fools. Every social media company already copied or utilizes the same techniques as TikTok, which is already a massive platform because they don’t spam ban or regulate content as hard as Facebook and YouTube do.

    It is insulting that a Chinese run social media platform provides more freedom of speech online than its US competitors.

    They’re banning it to remove competition, congress does not care about its effects on privacy or health, otherwise they’d have done something about Faceebook, Insta, Twiiter, and YouTube decades ago. They pulled their usual committee shenanigans to pretend to care by calling in CEOs to testify, and then promptly accepting a shitload of lobbying money.

    • Trantarius@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      15 days ago

      Absolutely none of this law was ever about privacy or mental health. No one ever claimed it was. The law is banning tiktok because it is based in China. That is the reason given by the law itself. The possibility that meta or Google or some other American company will buy or replace tiktok and operate the same way is not an unintended outcome. It is literally the whole point of the law to get bytedance to sell tiktok to an American company.

      • JackbyDev@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        14 days ago

        Hence them saying it’s braindead to say otherwise.

        What would be interesting to see is if other countries ban Facebook because it’s a “national security risk” lol.

        • maplebar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          14 days ago

          From China’s perspective, Facebook probably IS a “national security risk”, which is why it is already banned over there.

          For American to do business and sell products in China, they almost always have to go through a Chinese company. I’m sure that’s part capitalism and part accountability theater, but it’s just a fact. So why is it such an outrage for America to ask TikTok to do the same?

          • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            14 days ago

            Google is even banned in China. Most Western social media and tech platforms are banned there, and have been for decades.

          • JackbyDev@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            14 days ago

            Because the end result of this line of thinking is every country having siloed social media and not being able to communicate.

          • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            14 days ago

            Throw in that Tik Tok is banned in China, so it won’t be a national security risk for them to sell it, just profit and then have to invest that money into other forms

    • Cowabunga_It_Is@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      14 days ago

      Banning one platform would not magically get rid of short attention span and brainrot you fools.

      Ah yes, the old “Taking this action won’t solve all of the problems therefore we should do nothing” argument.

    • OfficerBribe@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      14 days ago

      Agree on this except I have doubts that this statement is true

      It is insulting that a Chinese run social media platform provides more freedom of speech online than its US competitors.

      • Katana314@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        14 days ago

        Isn’t this the one where people started saying “g*y” because there’s only one sexuality and Taiwan doesn’t exist?

      • Ostrichgrif@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        14 days ago

        Yeah tiktok is the reason we have words like unalive, I wouldnt call it freedom of speech just incompetent moderation.

          • Cowabunga_It_Is@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            14 days ago

            I have to admit, it’s a bit bizarre seeing so many comments holding up TikTok as if it’s a free speech bastion away from western-run social media companies.

    • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      14 days ago

      You think the communist party of China will allow western billionaires to buy one of their asymmetrical psyops weapon systems? Ha!

    • Tregetour@lemdro.id
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      15 days ago

      Competitor lobbying doesn’t even enter into it, I’d guess.

      The US State Department won’t tolerate Americans being exposed to media that doesn’t adhere to its view of the world. What large groups of Americans think - and vitally, the bounds of what they are permitted to think - is a national security ‘issue’ in the eyes of the state. No such problem exists with Facebook, cable news, the establishment newspapers, etc. As Chomsky teaches, propaganda is equally about what isn’t in the news.

    • Sauerkraut@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      15 days ago

      That implies that social media is going to be banned; it isn’t. The only thing this ban does is punish Tiktok for allowing content that revealed Israel’s genocide.

      The thing about freedom of speech is that we are only allowed speech that doesn’t threaten the interests of the oligarchs. If any speech creates a real movement that threatens the oligarchy then the government takes swift action against it (hence outlawing socialism during the red scare)

  • Sludgehammer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    51
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    16 days ago

    Ha, eat that China! Now you need to pay millions to American oligarchs for all our user data!

    USA!

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      16 days ago

      TikTok has said multiple times they will not sell. They will just exit the US market.

    • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      15 days ago

      How nice must it be to be able to force your biggest competitor to sell their business off. You either get it on the cheap, or get to make the replacement product.

  • Fedizen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    15 days ago

    stupid rule that helped cost Harris the election. Fuck every moron that voted for it.

  • MisterScruffy@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    31
    ·
    16 days ago

    Trump said he’ll unban it, if he does that’ll be the one brightside of the new admin

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      15 days ago

      I don’t see it as a bright side, but I also think it should be unbanned. Don’t get me wrong, I think TikTok is cancer and nobody should use it, but I also don’t think the government should decide what propaganda I get to consume.

      The government should absolutely do a public campaign against it and keep a close eye on it, but don’t ban it.

      In the meantime, we should look into passing laws to solve the underlying problems, which would impact Meta and other big social media orgs as well. Or maybe fund independent social media alternatives that are FOSS.

      But don’t ban speech. Banning TikTok feels a little too close to banning books…

    • 31337@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      15 days ago

      I think TikTok appeased the right by changing their algorithm. Charlie Kirk is apparently doing extremely well on the platform now.