4 ms·

I'm not really in favor of banning anything. As soon as you carve out something that should be banned, then things that shouldn't be banned are twisted by the

I'm not really in favor of banning anything. As soon as you carve out something that should be banned, then things that shouldn't be banned are twisted by the detractors into being the class of material that should be banned. Today you get rid of Tiktok because it's Chinese Propaganda, and tomorrow you say that The New York Times reporting is propaganda that must also be banned. Then there are no information sources except from whoever is in charge, and that's basically the end of democracy. I think the cat is out of the bag with Tiktok. If we really think the Chinese government is going to influence ordinary Americans, I'd like to hear why they shouldn't be allowed to do that, and I'd like to hear why they won't just start using Instagram Stories or YouTube Shorts. I get the feeling that old people (like me now I guess) are annoyed that people use Tiktok to come up with absurd pranks that hurt a lot of people and that this platform gives them an audience. But I guarantee that if it's banned, we'll just see the "YouTube Kia Stealing Challenge" or whatever. The software issue is worrying. If video-sharing applications can be used as malware vectors, that is an iOS/Android bug that needs to be fixed with high urgency. Whatever Tiktok can do, your Verizon app or local newspaper can also do. Do you trust their IT teams to not let malware slip into production builds? I don't. So the OS needs to compartmentalize every app, and disallow wholesale information sharing (no device ID, no access to contacts, etc.; those features are totally unnecessary). All in all, preventing certain people from having a printing press is against everything our country stands for. Yeah, dumb people can do a lot of harm by publishing dumb things. We balance that risk with with happens when smart people can't publish smart things. Governments have always hated that, but it's always been good for ordinary citizens.

UberFly 3y ago
Not being in favor of banning anything sounds noble on the surface, but it isn't plausible. Society is built from the ground up on things people can and can't do.
- scarface_74 3y ago
  And this is problem. Grown people should be able to do anything they want to do as long as it doesn’t affect anyone else.
  - mullen 3y ago
    What a simplistic view of the world. The Chinese government will use their control of TikTok to allow them to have as much control and influence as possible and they won't subscribe to the view of "do what you want as long as it does not affect anyone else". Their view will be "do what we tell you or else".
    - scarface_74 3y ago
      So out of all the things that are “controlling people’s minds” - drugs, alcohol, pay to win games, gambling sites, and the US news media, that’s where you draw the line? What’s next, we are going to ban EU media because they may influence people with their evil socialist agenda? Last I checked, it wasn’t Chinese media that riled up a bunch of yokels to storm the Capital and has a large percentage of the population thinking that the “election was stolen”
      - Dan_Sylveste 3y ago
        > EU media > socialist agenda? There isn't a single country in the EU that's in any meaningful way 'socialist'. Stop derailing. As to your last point: approximately what dollar value of damage was done to schools as a result of the 'devious licks' viral videos trend from last year? And on what platform did those viral videos trend?
        scarface_74 3y ago
        I agree completely - EU isn’t socialist. Do you think that right wing conservatives feel the same way? You see what happens when you give the government power to decide what should and shouldn’t be seen? And you sound a lot like the federal government when they wanted to ban NWA because they said they were putting police in danger. So now it’s okay to ban platforms that cause “bad things” to go viral? Is media also to blame for Jan 6th?
        Dan_Sylveste 3y ago
- abfan1127 3y ago
  free societies are allowed to people to do unsavory things. Sometimes things change and activities once frowned upon become mainstream once people realize its not bad (or is quite good).
- tenebrisalietum 3y ago
  Compare a society that bans lots of things (North Korea) with a society that doesn't (the US). Where would you rather live?
  - mrguyorama 3y ago
    If not banning anything is clearly a better society, why don't you live in Somalia? Or maybe there's more complex relationships going on
    - tenebrisalietum 3y ago
      Somalia bans lots of things, probably on the same level as North Korea. Not sure where you're going with this.
Dan_Sylveste 3y ago
> influence ordinary Americans, I'd like to hear why they shouldn't be allowed to do that You can find these arguments made in any of the many court decisions related to the foreign funding of trade union groups and other activist entities. Take your pick, there's no shortage to choose from in almost every single anglosphere jurisdiction you can think of.
gentleman11 3y ago
The printing press analogy isn't really the right analogy when it comes to media "platforms" (any media platform). It's not really about allowing or banning a printing press, it's about companies deciding what printing presses citizens will see work from, what gets boosted and what gets buried, via a behind-the-scenes mechanism and based on heavily profiling users first. And because of the size of these platforms, the dynamic is different than say TV networks. Eg, think of Youtube's control over what videos people see on the internet, it's crazy how much cultural and political influence this gives them So, it's sort of a subliminal form of influence, not a "this is what I have to say, now make up your mind" situation, and one with a lack of alternatives. Also, that profiling data being sent to China's government is sketchy. I mean, in Canada, there's a national scandal about election interference and Chinese government outposts policing/pressuring Canadians as it is TV networks were kind of similar actually, just less personalized, and way smaller in scale so that viewers could have some choice over what company controls what they see. Somewhat... maybe...
- jrockway 3y ago
  So not a printing press but a bookstore? Society seems to have somehow outlasted Barnes & Noble.

UberFly 3y ago

Not being in favor of banning anything sounds noble on the surface, but it isn't plausible. Society is built from the ground up on things people can and can't do.

scarface_74 3y ago
And this is problem. Grown people should be able to do anything they want to do as long as it doesn’t affect anyone else.
- mullen 3y ago
  What a simplistic view of the world. The Chinese government will use their control of TikTok to allow them to have as much control and influence as possible and they won't subscribe to the view of "do what you want as long as it does not affect anyone else". Their view will be "do what we tell you or else".
  - scarface_74 3y ago
    So out of all the things that are “controlling people’s minds” - drugs, alcohol, pay to win games, gambling sites, and the US news media, that’s where you draw the line? What’s next, we are going to ban EU media because they may influence people with their evil socialist agenda? Last I checked, it wasn’t Chinese media that riled up a bunch of yokels to storm the Capital and has a large percentage of the population thinking that the “election was stolen”
    - Dan_Sylveste 3y ago
      > EU media > socialist agenda? There isn't a single country in the EU that's in any meaningful way 'socialist'. Stop derailing. As to your last point: approximately what dollar value of damage was done to schools as a result of the 'devious licks' viral videos trend from last year? And on what platform did those viral videos trend?
      - scarface_74 3y ago
        I agree completely - EU isn’t socialist. Do you think that right wing conservatives feel the same way? You see what happens when you give the government power to decide what should and shouldn’t be seen? And you sound a lot like the federal government when they wanted to ban NWA because they said they were putting police in danger. So now it’s okay to ban platforms that cause “bad things” to go viral? Is media also to blame for Jan 6th?
        Dan_Sylveste 3y ago
abfan1127 3y ago
free societies are allowed to people to do unsavory things. Sometimes things change and activities once frowned upon become mainstream once people realize its not bad (or is quite good).
tenebrisalietum 3y ago
Compare a society that bans lots of things (North Korea) with a society that doesn't (the US). Where would you rather live?
- mrguyorama 3y ago
  If not banning anything is clearly a better society, why don't you live in Somalia? Or maybe there's more complex relationships going on
  - tenebrisalietum 3y ago
    Somalia bans lots of things, probably on the same level as North Korea. Not sure where you're going with this.

Dan_Sylveste 3y ago

> influence ordinary Americans, I'd like to hear why they shouldn't be allowed to do that You can find these arguments made in any of the many court decisions related to the foreign funding of trade union groups and other activist entities. Take your pick, there's no shortage to choose from in almost every single anglosphere jurisdiction you can think of.

gentleman11 3y ago

The printing press analogy isn't really the right analogy when it comes to media "platforms" (any media platform). It's not really about allowing or banning a printing press, it's about companies deciding what printing presses citizens will see work from, what gets boosted and what gets buried, via a behind-the-scenes mechanism and based on heavily profiling users first. And because of the size of these platforms, the dynamic is different than say TV networks. Eg, think of Youtube's control over what videos people see on the internet, it's crazy how much cultural and political influence this gives them So, it's sort of a subliminal form of influence, not a "this is what I have to say, now make up your mind" situation, and one with a lack of alternatives. Also, that profiling data being sent to China's government is sketchy. I mean, in Canada, there's a national scandal about election interference and Chinese government outposts policing/pressuring Canadians as it is TV networks were kind of similar actually, just less personalized, and way smaller in scale so that viewers could have some choice over what company controls what they see. Somewhat... maybe...

jrockway 3y ago
So not a printing press but a bookstore? Society seems to have somehow outlasted Barnes & Noble.