8 ms·

Why are the Hacker News comments on this so different than when this topic came up a few years ago? I feel like a few years ago this site was inundated with po

Why are the Hacker News comments on this so different than when this topic came up a few years ago? I feel like a few years ago this site was inundated with posts arguing largely "Anyone anywhere on earth should be able to do business in the U.S. and own U.S. subsidary companies, no exceptions." These seem largely absent today.

pcdoodle 2y ago
As HN garners eyeballs and also being an election year, I would suppose PR elements would bleed through the comments. I started coming here about 5-8 years ago because of the comments section usually having insider or wicked smart people and their viewpoints. You did the right thing by asking this question. It might be downvoted but we can all see something and say something.
Am4TIfIsER0ppos 2y ago
Who was president a few years ago? Who was banning it a few years ago?
- Jensson 2y ago
  Yeah, political opinions change so much just by having a different person doing them.
filoleg 2y ago
> These seem largely absent today. I still hold the same stance today, but I am just tired of arguing for it on HN. I noticed the same thing with the prevailing opinion on the issue changing on HN as well. However, it wasnt because there are better arguments for the ban now or some new relevant info got discovered that would affect it. Nope, it literally devolved into tit-for-tat arguments only, except this pretty much makes the US lose any high ground here. For people who dont see how maintaining the high ground in this specific scenario[0] is very advantageous and cheap for the US, I don’t have much to add that wasnt already discussed to death in all the previous HN threads on this. P.S. It sucks I even feel the need to say this, but no, I dont support the chinese government and have zero affiliation with it whatsoever (at least none that I am aware of lol). I do have a lot of respect for the country itself and their people. However, my respect for the country and their people is not relevant to my opinions on absolutely anything related to policymaking. 0. No, I dont believe in this approach for every scenario ever involving the US and China. Of course, I do believe in reciprocal trade sanctions and tarrifs. I dont believe in those nearly as much when it comes to the digital realm, and especially not when it is something like TikTok.
- mensetmanusman 2y ago
  Tit for tat is actually the known optimum solution for these game theoretic interactions.
  - Jensson 2y ago
    Tit for tat, but start out nice. Second part is very important, that way we have nice relationships with most of the world.
  - kjhcvkek77 2y ago
    That's not quite right. Always defecting is game theoretically optimal. However, under realistic conditions, where many agents are predisposed to cooperate but some do not that's where a tit for tat strategy can work incredibly well. That people are predisposed to cooperate is an assumption you have to make, it cannot be derived from the rules of the game itself.
    - mensetmanusman 2y ago
      Always defecting doesn't work when the adversary has memory:)
rchaud 2y ago
My opinion is still the same. If TikTok represents a threat, let the DOJ or FTC or whoever look into it and present a case to the courts and to the American public. Congress can get the voters on its side by writing a bill requiring stronger privacy measures on iOS/Android for example. But they won't because this would adversely impact Google and Facebook. A government ban is an authoritarian move that will inevitably expand to non-TikTok apps. As for a broader change in opinion, I'd say that since 2022, American businesses have been happy to rally around protectionist policies in general (especially after the end of ZIRP) and that attitude feeds through to HN'ers that put a disproportionate amount of stock in things that people like Musk say. For example, here's Musk admitting that Chinese EVs will dominate global market share without trade barriers: https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/tesla-ceo-musk-chinese-ev-firms-will-demolish-rivals-without-trade-barriers-2024-01-25/ https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/tesla-...
- Jensson 2y ago
  This isn't about privacy, this is about influence. CCP having direct chain of authority to control what Americans watch isn't a thing many want.
  - kelseyfrog 2y ago
    To be clear, we haven't been asked about it. Besides the framing of the question ultimately begs the response. Q1: Is it ok for China to control what Americans watch? Q2: Should companies have free association? Q1 and Q2 determine the same decision, but express different values and ultimately different responses. You have to be honest that the framing begs a particular response. That's the part that's not unbiased.
    - Jensson 2y ago
      Answer to Q2 is easy: no. Nobody thinks that companies should be allowed to pledge allegiance to whoever they wish, there are already lots of laws in every country against pledging allegiance to terrorists or being owned by terrorists etc.
corimaith 2y ago
Opinions change as the situation in reality changes. Especially with the rising geopolitical tensions and the Ukraine war, not to mention now with Palestine, there's a fair portion of people who might have been more neutral that are now more hawkish. My perspective is that if one truly cares about these ideals of freedom or such, would they be better fulfilled through keeping US Congress in line or a dominant CCP? If the CCP "wins", if they establish economic hegemony, just like we see with the censorship with Taiwan, whatever talk about defending freedoms right now against ourselves would be irrelevant at that point to an external adversary.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
red-iron-pine 2y ago
> Why are the Hacker News comments on this so different than when this topic came up a few years ago? * Tiktok competes with FAANGM (MMANGA?) type companies, which happen to be heavily represented here, and those people may have pointed thoughts * apropos of FAANGMs, China recently banned or set strict rules for FAANGM companies in China. If they're not going to play nice + make dubious demands, why shouldn't the US behave similarly? * GPT is a thing... and was then, too. all available bot power may be focused on elections / Trump trials / Israel / Ukraine / etc., when it wasn't before, and rapid changes to viewpoints may reflect that; the 50 Cent Party has bigger fights to pick, etc. * sort of a corollary to the above, it's an election year, a big one in several ways, and that drives the (real, human) commenters out in droves
sdwr 2y ago
The werewolf is coming: http://sdwr.ca/link/30 http://sdwr.ca/link/30
ksec 2y ago
The political spectrum of HN largely shifted from ~2013 to 2022, and since then gradually shifted back. For most people it takes some time to burn off all the good faith for certain things before reality set in.

pcdoodle 2y ago

As HN garners eyeballs and also being an election year, I would suppose PR elements would bleed through the comments. I started coming here about 5-8 years ago because of the comments section usually having insider or wicked smart people and their viewpoints. You did the right thing by asking this question. It might be downvoted but we can all see something and say something.

Am4TIfIsER0ppos 2y ago

Who was president a few years ago? Who was banning it a few years ago?

Jensson 2y ago
Yeah, political opinions change so much just by having a different person doing them.

filoleg 2y ago

> These seem largely absent today. I still hold the same stance today, but I am just tired of arguing for it on HN. I noticed the same thing with the prevailing opinion on the issue changing on HN as well. However, it wasnt because there are better arguments for the ban now or some new relevant info got discovered that would affect it. Nope, it literally devolved into tit-for-tat arguments only, except this pretty much makes the US lose any high ground here. For people who dont see how maintaining the high ground in this specific scenario[0] is very advantageous and cheap for the US, I don’t have much to add that wasnt already discussed to death in all the previous HN threads on this. P.S. It sucks I even feel the need to say this, but no, I dont support the chinese government and have zero affiliation with it whatsoever (at least none that I am aware of lol). I do have a lot of respect for the country itself and their people. However, my respect for the country and their people is not relevant to my opinions on absolutely anything related to policymaking. 0. No, I dont believe in this approach for every scenario ever involving the US and China. Of course, I do believe in reciprocal trade sanctions and tarrifs. I dont believe in those nearly as much when it comes to the digital realm, and especially not when it is something like TikTok.

mensetmanusman 2y ago
Tit for tat is actually the known optimum solution for these game theoretic interactions.
- Jensson 2y ago
  Tit for tat, but start out nice. Second part is very important, that way we have nice relationships with most of the world.
- kjhcvkek77 2y ago
  That's not quite right. Always defecting is game theoretically optimal. However, under realistic conditions, where many agents are predisposed to cooperate but some do not that's where a tit for tat strategy can work incredibly well. That people are predisposed to cooperate is an assumption you have to make, it cannot be derived from the rules of the game itself.
  - mensetmanusman 2y ago
    Always defecting doesn't work when the adversary has memory:)

rchaud 2y ago

My opinion is still the same. If TikTok represents a threat, let the DOJ or FTC or whoever look into it and present a case to the courts and to the American public. Congress can get the voters on its side by writing a bill requiring stronger privacy measures on iOS/Android for example. But they won't because this would adversely impact Google and Facebook. A government ban is an authoritarian move that will inevitably expand to non-TikTok apps. As for a broader change in opinion, I'd say that since 2022, American businesses have been happy to rally around protectionist policies in general (especially after the end of ZIRP) and that attitude feeds through to HN'ers that put a disproportionate amount of stock in things that people like Musk say. For example, here's Musk admitting that Chinese EVs will dominate global market share without trade barriers: https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/tesla-ceo-musk-chinese-ev-firms-will-demolish-rivals-without-trade-barriers-2024-01-25/ https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/tesla-...

Jensson 2y ago
This isn't about privacy, this is about influence. CCP having direct chain of authority to control what Americans watch isn't a thing many want.
- kelseyfrog 2y ago
  To be clear, we haven't been asked about it. Besides the framing of the question ultimately begs the response. Q1: Is it ok for China to control what Americans watch? Q2: Should companies have free association? Q1 and Q2 determine the same decision, but express different values and ultimately different responses. You have to be honest that the framing begs a particular response. That's the part that's not unbiased.
  - Jensson 2y ago
    Answer to Q2 is easy: no. Nobody thinks that companies should be allowed to pledge allegiance to whoever they wish, there are already lots of laws in every country against pledging allegiance to terrorists or being owned by terrorists etc.

corimaith 2y ago

Opinions change as the situation in reality changes. Especially with the rising geopolitical tensions and the Ukraine war, not to mention now with Palestine, there's a fair portion of people who might have been more neutral that are now more hawkish. My perspective is that if one truly cares about these ideals of freedom or such, would they be better fulfilled through keeping US Congress in line or a dominant CCP? If the CCP "wins", if they establish economic hegemony, just like we see with the censorship with Taiwan, whatever talk about defending freedoms right now against ourselves would be irrelevant at that point to an external adversary.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

red-iron-pine 2y ago

> Why are the Hacker News comments on this so different than when this topic came up a few years ago? * Tiktok competes with FAANGM (MMANGA?) type companies, which happen to be heavily represented here, and those people may have pointed thoughts * apropos of FAANGMs, China recently banned or set strict rules for FAANGM companies in China. If they're not going to play nice + make dubious demands, why shouldn't the US behave similarly? * GPT is a thing... and was then, too. all available bot power may be focused on elections / Trump trials / Israel / Ukraine / etc., when it wasn't before, and rapid changes to viewpoints may reflect that; the 50 Cent Party has bigger fights to pick, etc. * sort of a corollary to the above, it's an election year, a big one in several ways, and that drives the (real, human) commenters out in droves

sdwr 2y ago

The werewolf is coming: http://sdwr.ca/link/30 http://sdwr.ca/link/30

ksec 2y ago

The political spectrum of HN largely shifted from ~2013 to 2022, and since then gradually shifted back. For most people it takes some time to burn off all the good faith for certain things before reality set in.