6 ms·
This deal was signed in May 2019, before the questions about Chinese control over TikTok had really come to the forefront. There's a decent chance that it's sim
by lacker 6y ago
This deal was signed in May 2019, before the questions about Chinese control over TikTok had really come to the forefront. There's a decent chance that it's simply about Google giving TikTok a better deal, or other infrastructural features like global availability.
- justicezyx 6y agoAnyone who believed US would allow a Chinese controlled internet company to reach mainstream is plainly self deceiving. US and China are both super power. Don’t be naive that they would be doing things differently.
- tempestn 6y agoPretty sure in 2019 if [Chinese company] offered to pay Google a bunch of money for cloud services, Google would take it. Unlike in China, large US corporations don't act as an extension of the government, so China being a rival superpower to the US wouldn't be terribly relevant. Not that the US in general avoids trading with China either.
- justicezyx 6y agoWhat are you talking about? I am saying TikTok has to base its engineering entirely in US soil, given its prospect to become main stream.
- throwaway1997 6y agoTiktok is just a rebranded version of the app called 抖音 (Douyin). It's made in China
- poiuytrewqa 6y agoTrue, but while tiktok is international and serve the content from servers not located in China. The Chinese version is different both in terms of content (you won't find the same "influencer") and in term of setup (servers in China with further settings to comply to stricter Chinese regulations)
- 0xEFF 6y agoTikTok is already mainstream.
- wonnage 6y agoHuawei (a Chinese company) was paying Google a bunch of money in 2019 until they were banned by the government. You may argue that this was justified for national security reasons, but the decision was ultimately up to the whims of the president, and not subject to any sort of actual process or oversight by elected officials.
- frequentnapper 6y agoTrump, like it or not, is an elected official and I doubt he understands very much about tech to make that decision on his own.
- samplatt 6y ago"Elected official" is such a funny term, these days. It CAN mean a legitimate installation of a decision-maker based on decisions (votes) of their peers, but in the case of Saruman the Orange, it can also mean the (unfortunately) technically-legitimate theft of power by hostile forces.
- lern_too_spel 6y agoWhat was Huawei paying Google for? If anything, Google was paying Huawei to be the default search engine on its phones outside of China.
- tehjoker 6y agoThe US government and corporations are basically one and the same. The USG will extend deals that favor corporations. China is an "enemy" to the extent that it will harm the profitability and flexibility of US corporations or the military empire that supports US market dominance. To think that a country half a world away would factor into calculations in any other way is a misunderstanding of great power politics. There is no military threat to anything a normal person would consider domestic interests.
- rpdillon 6y ago> The US government and corporations are basically one and the same. Not really. Corporations and the government fight about all kinds of stuff, like encryption, and handing over private information about their users. Companies try to buy influence through lobbying, sure, but that's a far cry from 'basically one and the same'.
- tehjoker 6y agoThis is a mere tactical disagreement. The government and the security state are extensively intertwined to an extent that the place where one begins and the other ends is hard to distangle given the revolving door of employees and defense contracts. The extent to which the buisness community as a whole has the ear of the government vs the people is evident given the extremely large disagreements between public opinion polls and implemented policy. If corporations want something, they don't always get it, but if the people want something and corps disagree the people almost never get it. Study: Gilens and Page. "Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens". American Political Science Association. 2014. pgs. 564-581. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-politics/article/testing-theories-of-american-politics-elites-interest-groups-and-average-citizens/62327F513959D0A304D4893B382B992B https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-poli... BBC Article about it: "Study: US is an oligarchy, not a democracy" https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746 https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746
- poiuytrewqa 6y ago
- Thorrez 6y agojusticezyx isn't saying Google would turn down a Chinese company's business. justicezyx is saying a Chinese company cannot become popular among US consumers. I don't exactly agree with that argument, but we should at least understand what the argument is.
- tempestn 6y agoI gather that from their later replies. I imagine you can see why I interpreted the statement that way in the first place though.
- rorykoehler 6y ago> large US corporations don't act as an extension of the government Have you read this? https://wikileaks.org/google-is-not-what-it-seems/ https://wikileaks.org/google-is-not-what-it-seems/
- KorematsuFred 6y agoYes, but we are discussing "compared to" scenario here.
- rorykoehler 6y agoI agree Chinese companies are basically branches of government if that's what you are saying however I also think the relationship between corporate USA and the federal government is a lot closer than most people realise.
- ethbro 6y ago"A lot closer than most people realise" != the same.
- mlindner 6y agoThere's been a sudden inrush in the last few days of tons sinophiles posting constantly. I wonder what's causing it.
- dang 6y agoWhat's causing it is clear: the community is divided and people have different opinions. This has been the case for a long time, so it's no sudden inrush. There's natural fluctuation, so it sometimes can feel that way. I posted about this a lot in the last couple of days. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23835613 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23835613 and the subthread underneath it (which you'll have to uncollapse). You can find other explanations at: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20chinese&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que... https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20china&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que... https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comment&storyText=false&prefix=true&page=0&query=by:dang%20astroturf https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme... The evidence is extremely clear, by the way. If we'd found any undue influence, we'd say so, but the private data confirms what's already clear from the public record (if you look at other users' commenting histories): people just disagree. The voting patterns don't show anything that the commenting patterns don't.
- mlindner 6y agoHmm interesting. These other people not only seem to disagree but seem to rely on different facts entirely. Perhaps there’s ongoing external disinformation campaigns and many are simply misinformed.