4 ms·

If the rational for the ban is "too much influence over the public," the root problem is that apps shouldn't have that much influence over the public. Being th

If the rational for the ban is "too much influence over the public," the root problem is that apps shouldn't have that much influence over the public. Being that artificially engaging, algorithmic and addictive is a public health hazard... But no leader is going to say that because the US is fine with the influence such apps project to other countries (among other things). And that influence doesn't have to be directly from the U.S. govt.

scarface_74 3y ago
Yes. Let’s start having the government banning everything that is a health hazard. Let’s have a “War on Algorithms”. That worked remarkably well for drugs. So what happens when we give the government the power to start banning websites that surface content algorithmically - like say Hacker News. I can see next we have to ban Reddit because r/cscareerquestions have a generation of computer grads thinking that if they spend months “grinding leetCode” and trying to working “for a FAANG” and failing, they feel like a failure.
- j_maffe 3y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope
  - scarface_74 3y ago
    Who defines "too much influence over the public,"? Which has more influence TikTok or conservative news media that convinced people to try to overthrow the government?
    - brucethemoose2 3y ago
      Overly engaging social media has weaponized conservative news media, among many other things. Blasting propaganda over cable, radio, magazines and such is as old as America itself. Thats fine. Its part of the deal. But a device that lives in your pocket, essentially required for participating in society, with many billions spent on stopping you from disengaging is an entirely different thing. There is no good historical precedent for how psycologically manipulative that is. Its unacceptable because China could quite probably start a civil war with such influence. Its not OK for Facebook, Google, or any government to have that unchecked power even if they just use it to sell ads or whatever. So... I dunno where the line should be. But wherever that is, we are well past it.
      - scarface_74 3y ago
        So we shouldn’t ban media that you can view over cable and radio. But it’s okay to ban media if it is on cell phones? So we should also ban US companies from being able to distribute propaganda over cell phones? If the US bans TikTok from app stores should they also ban TikTok from being viewed on the web? Do we institute a “great firewall”?
        brucethemoose2 3y ago
        I don't know what good policy would look like, but off the top of my head enforcing "attention guidelines" in iOS/Android and putting limits on personalized tracking in US software seems reasonable.
        scarface_74 3y ago
        So now they should put limits on how much time you can watch media?
        brucethemoose2 3y ago
        No, but maybe (for example) notifications constantly popping up in the background begging you to open an app based on highly personalized data should be. The US is not China, its not going to try and dictate how much screen time kinds should get or whatever.
        scarface_74 3y ago
        Right because in the US, no state official would punish a private company - say an amusement park - for speaking out against a law that it passed to keep teachers from admitting gay people exist - because we aren’t China.
    - mrguyorama 3y ago
      >Who defines "too much influence over the public,"? Everyone knows drawing arbitrary lines in the sand is physically impossible, and we have never done anything like it before, and famously, American law has zero grey area and zero ambiguity about anything because everything is perfectly defineable in human life. Slippery slope is a fallacy because it just pretends that decisions aren't being made at every single point on the slope. Notice how some drugs are illegal and others are less illegal? But if you ban one drug that's a slippery slope to ban all drugs!!!! People make decisions in grey areas all the fucking time. There are judges answering those exact questions right now. That's like, their job.
      - scarface_74 3y ago
        And you’re okay with judges who are always political making decisions for you? How about we just not give government and unelected judges power over our lives?
        mrguyorama 3y ago
        What's your magical alternative to a human system? Is it anarchy? No thanks, full stop. Is it "just make the laws clear and concise and easy to understand"? I take it you've never built software around human things before, or you would understand that's an unsolveable problem, and would require humans in the loop making human decisions just the same.
        scarface_74 3y ago
        It’s simple everyone should have the right to swing their fist up to the point where it hits someone else’s face.
        brayhite 3y ago
        You have the right to swing your fist where no one else notices it happen. Beyond that, it’s up to debate.
engineer_22 3y ago
well, we do require foreign broadcasters to register with the US govt because we want oversight and a cudgel. If there were a threat during a crisis we should expect the US gov't to pull the plug on these broadcasters (and similarly TikTok). TikTok has some good things going for it, but it also has a sinister side. Some oversight is probably prudent. Same goes for all the public-content streamers.

scarface_74 3y ago

Yes. Let’s start having the government banning everything that is a health hazard. Let’s have a “War on Algorithms”. That worked remarkably well for drugs. So what happens when we give the government the power to start banning websites that surface content algorithmically - like say Hacker News. I can see next we have to ban Reddit because r/cscareerquestions have a generation of computer grads thinking that if they spend months “grinding leetCode” and trying to working “for a FAANG” and failing, they feel like a failure.

j_maffe 3y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope
- scarface_74 3y ago
  Who defines "too much influence over the public,"? Which has more influence TikTok or conservative news media that convinced people to try to overthrow the government?
  - brucethemoose2 3y ago
    Overly engaging social media has weaponized conservative news media, among many other things. Blasting propaganda over cable, radio, magazines and such is as old as America itself. Thats fine. Its part of the deal. But a device that lives in your pocket, essentially required for participating in society, with many billions spent on stopping you from disengaging is an entirely different thing. There is no good historical precedent for how psycologically manipulative that is. Its unacceptable because China could quite probably start a civil war with such influence. Its not OK for Facebook, Google, or any government to have that unchecked power even if they just use it to sell ads or whatever. So... I dunno where the line should be. But wherever that is, we are well past it.
    - scarface_74 3y ago
      So we shouldn’t ban media that you can view over cable and radio. But it’s okay to ban media if it is on cell phones? So we should also ban US companies from being able to distribute propaganda over cell phones? If the US bans TikTok from app stores should they also ban TikTok from being viewed on the web? Do we institute a “great firewall”?
      - brucethemoose2 3y ago
        I don't know what good policy would look like, but off the top of my head enforcing "attention guidelines" in iOS/Android and putting limits on personalized tracking in US software seems reasonable.
        scarface_74 3y ago
        So now they should put limits on how much time you can watch media?
        brucethemoose2 3y ago
        No, but maybe (for example) notifications constantly popping up in the background begging you to open an app based on highly personalized data should be. The US is not China, its not going to try and dictate how much screen time kinds should get or whatever.
        scarface_74 3y ago
        Right because in the US, no state official would punish a private company - say an amusement park - for speaking out against a law that it passed to keep teachers from admitting gay people exist - because we aren’t China.
  - mrguyorama 3y ago
    >Who defines "too much influence over the public,"? Everyone knows drawing arbitrary lines in the sand is physically impossible, and we have never done anything like it before, and famously, American law has zero grey area and zero ambiguity about anything because everything is perfectly defineable in human life. Slippery slope is a fallacy because it just pretends that decisions aren't being made at every single point on the slope. Notice how some drugs are illegal and others are less illegal? But if you ban one drug that's a slippery slope to ban all drugs!!!! People make decisions in grey areas all the fucking time. There are judges answering those exact questions right now. That's like, their job.
    - scarface_74 3y ago
      And you’re okay with judges who are always political making decisions for you? How about we just not give government and unelected judges power over our lives?
      - mrguyorama 3y ago
        What's your magical alternative to a human system? Is it anarchy? No thanks, full stop. Is it "just make the laws clear and concise and easy to understand"? I take it you've never built software around human things before, or you would understand that's an unsolveable problem, and would require humans in the loop making human decisions just the same.
        scarface_74 3y ago
        It’s simple everyone should have the right to swing their fist up to the point where it hits someone else’s face.
        brayhite 3y ago
        You have the right to swing your fist where no one else notices it happen. Beyond that, it’s up to debate.

engineer_22 3y ago

well, we do require foreign broadcasters to register with the US govt because we want oversight and a cudgel. If there were a threat during a crisis we should expect the US gov't to pull the plug on these broadcasters (and similarly TikTok). TikTok has some good things going for it, but it also has a sinister side. Some oversight is probably prudent. Same goes for all the public-content streamers.