4 ms·

This seems sloppy. If I were to build an app that was popular in say Cuba or something I wouldn't leave myself technical gateways to access the data and manipu

This seems sloppy. If I were to build an app that was popular in say Cuba or something I wouldn't leave myself technical gateways to access the data and manipulate things directly. That would leave a clear paper trail and open me up to some innocent engineer stumbling across what's happening. Rather I would embed trusted people into the company at low to mid-level positions of power, like software engineers, content moderators, etc. where they could quietly use their influence on shape things in ways that are favorable to my goals. I would do this with every company I could get them hired at not just the one making my app. If I really had a need to exert undue influence I would use a side-channel to communicate instructions to people at the company (potentially even the leadership) and rely on them to carry out the orders. Remoting in and changing things myself seems silly.

Kadin 3y ago
Sure, and that's probably happening as well. But it shows a level of not-giving-a-fuck if they're just leaving not-even-well-hidden "backdoors" in, so people in China can get access. It suggests to me that the software engineers writing this stuff don't really think of ByteDance US or the US version of TikTok as being any different from ByteDance China. Because of course they don't: I don't think ByteDance itself, or its leadership, does. The whole idea of separating the company internally is a sham, and it's almost always a sham when companies claim to do internal firewalling or controls like that. (See also: pre-2008 financial companies that did both consulting and accounting/audit, and claimed they never talked across that line. Of course they did!) TikTok is a shining example of both China being China (no real private/public sector separation, lying as standard practice, economic policy is just war by other means) and the US being the US (everything is for sale, everyone's loyalty can be rented, all laws are negotiable, workers / average people exist to be exploited rather than protected, if it's profitable it can't be that wrong)... and we wonder why it's a trainwreck for average users.
schuke 3y ago
From a Leninist bureaucratic perspective, a paper trail is exactly what someone wants as a mid-level official: if something goes wrong a paper trail transfers responsibility to her higher-ups, reducing the chance this person becoming a scapegoat. Especially useful if someone's caught in a intra-party power struggle, in an area dealing with foreign entities where waters are muddier. Trust is very rare in the Leninist party. Not sure if the same logic works in other governments though.

Kadin 3y ago

Sure, and that's probably happening as well. But it shows a level of not-giving-a-fuck if they're just leaving not-even-well-hidden "backdoors" in, so people in China can get access. It suggests to me that the software engineers writing this stuff don't really think of ByteDance US or the US version of TikTok as being any different from ByteDance China. Because of course they don't: I don't think ByteDance itself, or its leadership, does. The whole idea of separating the company internally is a sham, and it's almost always a sham when companies claim to do internal firewalling or controls like that. (See also: pre-2008 financial companies that did both consulting and accounting/audit, and claimed they never talked across that line. Of course they did!) TikTok is a shining example of both China being China (no real private/public sector separation, lying as standard practice, economic policy is just war by other means) and the US being the US (everything is for sale, everyone's loyalty can be rented, all laws are negotiable, workers / average people exist to be exploited rather than protected, if it's profitable it can't be that wrong)... and we wonder why it's a trainwreck for average users.

schuke 3y ago

From a Leninist bureaucratic perspective, a paper trail is exactly what someone wants as a mid-level official: if something goes wrong a paper trail transfers responsibility to her higher-ups, reducing the chance this person becoming a scapegoat. Especially useful if someone's caught in a intra-party power struggle, in an area dealing with foreign entities where waters are muddier. Trust is very rare in the Leninist party. Not sure if the same logic works in other governments though.