7 ms·

Just because it doesn’t say “ban” doesn’t mean its not one. It is well known that China lists algorithms and AI models trained on citizen data as a non-export s

Just because it doesn’t say “ban” doesn’t mean its not one. It is well known that China lists algorithms and AI models trained on citizen data as a non-export so tiktok will never be able to sell to anyone other than a Chinese company unless they retrain the model etc. The CEO has mentioned that they will simply pull out of the US market.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
wmf 2y ago
So not only does TikTok have to be sold but they also have to remove the addiction algorithm? This deal just gets better and better!
- beezlebroxxxxxx 2y ago
  > they also have to remove the addiction algorithm Whoever they sell it to, if they end up doing that, is going to be more than willing to put in place their own addiction algorithm, in just the same way that American social media and other adjacent tech companies have implemented them. I'm in no way a fan or user of TikTok, but thinking this will improve the app seems naive.
  - shrimp_emoji 2y ago
    Not really. A Facebook or Twitter-esque addiction algorithm is WAY better than a CCP addiction algorithm since the latter tries to socially engineer unrest and disillusion, on purpose, as a targeted act of Nakatomi-esque cyberwarfare against a totalitarian regime's rivals. The former kind maybe does so as an inadvertent externality, and with every reason to wager to a far lesser degree. Meta won't turn up the heat on antisemitism and down on something the CCP doesn't like. It might turn up the heat on, I don't know, trans rights, and down on neo Nazis, but it's much more benign dystopic info filtering than an actual "what will destabilize the US and fuel stochastic terrorism and civil war?" agenda (which is against Meta's best interest).
    - interactivecode 2y ago
      The US social media seems to be encouraging nationalism and conservatism. Which Im also not to happy about. It seems to be creating more unrest in the west rather than strength progress and unity. China might not even need to influence the west through tiktok, meta and friends seem to be doing plenty of it themselves. None of it seem to be making us progress forward tbh
      - shrimp_emoji 2y ago
        I give TikTok negative benefit of the doubt though. Nobody can prove if the stream of craziness is organic or a result of Chinese propagandists tuning the algorithm, but I'll believe it's the latter every time. Could I even afford not to? It's just game theory at this point. > None of it seem to be making us progress forward tbh The Nirvana Fallacy is when you reject the better of two outcomes because it's not good enough compared to some mythical optimum. In this case, the optimum could be some social media service that "strengthens progress and unity" or it could be a total ban on social media altogether, both of which seem pretty mythical. :p I believe organic, chaotic derangement is better than extrinsic, targeted derangement in magnitude and outcome.
        woooooo 2y ago
        This comment has almost brought me around to supporting a tiktok ban just to remove a leg from the conspiracy theories. Take some responsibility for Americans posting on social media to other Americans, for the love of god.
        lobochrome 2y ago
        Not sure why you're getting downvoted - but I think this is thoughtful and to the point. The highest ideal American SNS follow is profit. That will generate all kinds of externalities that might be bad for society. Still, at least so far, we've found it to be the least destructive optimization target in modern human history (vs. socialism). The CCP is clearly tuning the algorithm in the SNS under its control to limit topics it deems undesirable in its goal of an ideal society. Whoever thinks this isn't so bad hasn't experienced an authoritarian state personally or at least highly underestimates the pain and suffering one can inflict.
  - mminer237 2y ago
    Having the US's primary rival, which runs massive disinformation campaigns, also opaquely control the content that US youth consume en masse seems worse than...just about any alternative. Someone like Facebook wants the algorithm to show addictive content that generally isn't super offensive to the average person. Someone like the CCP wants the algorithm to show addictive content that idealizes "socialism with Chinese characteristics" and increases division in Western countries.
    - Capricorn2481 2y ago
      > increases division in Western countries I'm not convinced anything on TikTok is more divisive than any other social media platform. And Reddit seems to be filled with a lot more tankies than other platforms.
    - sangnoir 2y ago
      > Having the US's primary rival, which runs massive disinformation campaigns, also opaquely control the content that US youth consume en masse seems worse than...just about any alternative How is it worse than making disseminating disinformation illegal? The law as written lays bare the true motivation - it's not about fighting disinformation ("inauthentic user activity" has been detected across all social networks for the purposes of disinformation). It almost certainly is about protecting American companies from competitors with better AI algorithms. The legislature has telegraphed that the tech/potential for abuse are not problems by themselves - ownership by a Chinese company is what they take issue with.
      - ladzoppelin 2y ago
        But why is that a bad thing, China has the same regulations on companies not Chinese? Its not "better" algorithms its "weaponized" algorithms designed for specific populations including its own population which I imagine are not as damaging then the ones applied to others. My point is, of course this will be banned if the US gov cannot benefit from it and considered a threat to certain people.
        2y ago
- winternett 2y ago
  I'm looking forward to more regulation of social media to be honest... All of the algorithms only end up working against the entertainment and educational factor of it all anyway. I'm thoroughly convinced that the social media mega-platforms have all moved out of algorithms to just pushing sponsored ads all day. Many of these ads repeat far too often every time I log in, and it's been making me want to ban all the apps anyway...
  - EasyMark 2y ago
    I just don't we'll ever see bans of social media working in the USA if the company is from here, at least not for the next 15 years, SCOTUS will most likely shoot down any attempts to do any serious regulation of social media except for maybe people under 18.
    - intrasight 2y ago
      No social media company would stay in business without the under 18 demographic
  - sangnoir 2y ago
    > I'm looking forward to more regulation of social media to be honest I'm afraid that's not goign to happen in the US. Politicians never let a disaster go to waste: had the will been there to regulate social media in general, the hysteria around TikTok would have precipitated it. Instead, we got a law specifically targeting TikTok and ignoring other SM.
    - winternett 2y ago
      Facebook & Instagram have had tons of Congressional scrutiny over the past decade, the problem is they never really did much to fix issues with the platform as a result. The mere fact that these social media CEOs are building vast bunkers and amassing billions of dollars highlights the issue that they are literally shoveling value out of these platforms into their own pockets, and those of their investors, while preying upon the instincts of all their users in a deeply psychological manner.
- EasyMark 2y ago
  nah, that would be left up to tiktok, the CCP, and the buyer of the company, if there ever is a buyer and the CCP would even permit it.
  - cryoes 2y ago
    [flagged]
- astrea 2y ago
  Good thing it’s only those evil Chinese making algorithms such as this /s
- BobbyTables2 2y ago
  Remove the addiction algorithm? You mean like Facebook, YouTube, and Starbucks? Riiiggghhhttt…
  - saintfire 2y ago
    Coffeebourne addiction algorithms?
- seanmcdirmid 2y ago
  Google and Meta already have plenty of TikTok-style videos with addictive algorithms, so I don't think we will be much better off if TikTok leaves the market. Kids will just migrate to other competitors.
  - galdosdi 2y ago
    Yeah. Google won this war already by getting Chromebooks into schools, which are mandatorily tied to a Gsuite account and thus have YouTube Shorts, drive, Gmail, etc access. As a parent, I hate google a lot more than TikTok. I can already block TikTok, but I can't block youtube because the school district mandates it.
    - seanmcdirmid 2y ago
      They don't need chromebooks in schools, my kid uses YouTube kids at home (that doesn't include shorts), teens will have their own phone usually, and youtube is already a popular place for them to go, discovering YouTube shorts (if they haven't already), is easy. But ya, if a teen is otherwise cut off from devices besides the ones they get from school, then you could see that as a weak point, although I don't think that applies to a significant portion of families. For the ones that it does apply to, they probably have bigger problems to worry about than TikTok being banned.
    - k12sosse 2y ago
      The admins should be able to block YouTube for minors when asked. There's a way to do it but it's by OU not individual user. Fight for it if you want it.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
  - jonesn11 2y ago
    The algorithm's novelty and recommendation accuracy is so far beyond what other competitors like Google, Snapchat, and Meta have that this seems like a coordinated effort by the private sector to push forth their mediocre products and centralize social media service which I absolutely DETEST. Mark Zuckerberg has publicly announced how far behind Tiktok Meta was. Many years later they are still playing catchup. Though, the saddest thing is that it seems like the U.S citizens, (i.e ANY of tiktoks 160 MILLION US users) have absolutely no say in the operations,a yet we actually interact with the app not these old people in Congress. The fact that Biden so swiftly signed the bill too makes me frustrated as I want to vote for him, but he keeps doing or okaying things that are counter to my values.
jorblumesea 2y ago
Kind of reinforces the allegations of being CCP owned and compromised and not an independent entity. If you have poison pill provisions.
- RIMR 2y ago
  There are plenty of US companies that are authorized to use government-funded patents, that would prevent them from transferring ownership to foreign owners. This isn't a "poison pill" conspiracy, this is standard export control for state-funded technology.
  - riversflow 2y ago
    Any non-arms companies in that mix?
    - throwawaymaths 2y ago
      Merck (not an arms company) was expropriated from Merck.
      - riversflow 2y ago
        From the Germans, during WWI.
        throwawaymaths 2y ago
        Yeah sure. At least WWI Germany wasn't committing two genocides.
  - jorblumesea 2y ago
    Companies that are export controlled have military tech. The idea that a social media app would have a poison pill for export control is ridiculous and shows how owned these supposedly independent companies really are.
EasyMark 2y ago
They could work on a "good enough" algorithm that is basically already in public/open source domain when they sell it. 80% of its value is captive audience and "cool factor" with younger users.
Vegenoid 2y ago
Of course the CEO is going to say that, because they don't want the law passed. When the chips are down, it's a lot less likely that just pull out than that they take the money from one of the many salivating buyers.
- RIMR 2y ago
  If TikTok is in bed with the CCP as much as Congress says they are, think about the actual cause and effect of their different options. If ByteDance sells TikTok to US owners to satisfy the requirement, they give up control of a successful platform developed inside of China to a self-declared adversary that already controls most of the world's social media platforms, representing a significant loss to China as they attempt to compete online. If ByteDance ignores the demand to sell, the US government has obligated itself to prevent its citizens from accessing one of the most popular social media apps in existence, something that the affected users will be extremely angry about, and will likely make claims of state censorship. If I were China, and my goal was to leverage TikTok to do harm to America, I would choose the option that turns US citizens against the government over the option that transfers power from China to the US.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - Workaccount2 2y ago
    Tiktok isn't in bed with the CCP, it is the CCP. China is a communist country. State owned industry. The leash they give business "owners" might be long (long enough to fool westerns it's just another USA), but it is still a leash, and they are still under control of the party. No courts, no rights, no lawsuits. Party wants, party takes.
  - djur 2y ago
    Isn't the obvious alternative "split TikTok and sell TikTok USA"?
    - takeda 2y ago
mandeepj 2y ago
> The CEO has mentioned that they will simply pull out of the US market. Nope! He has said - TT is not going anywhere and vows to fight back legally. I was a bit shocked to find court put a hold on Trump’s ban of TT
- throwawaymaths 2y ago
  He'll lose, since the US already has done this sort of thing. Very big example: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merck_%26_Co https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merck_%26_Co.
kromem 2y ago
Theoretically they could sell "TikTok" to a US company who then licenses algorithm processing to the Chinese entity, no? The US entity isn't beholden to the CCP and can decide to switch algorithm providers if they suddenly notice it's getting very propaganda-y, which provides a degree of independent oversight appeasing US concerns while not necessitating actually switching from the current systems.
- djur 2y ago
  The law requires the President (i.e. executive agencies) to verify any such transaction, and it specifically calls out "cooperation with respect to the operation of a content recommendation algorithm or an agreement with respect to data sharing" as subject to review. So they thought about that.
- dbbk 2y ago
  "TikTok" in the US is already a US-based company in LA.
togg 2y ago
As I understand TikTok has been investing in building out a U.S. fulfillment center network over the past two years, perhaps a drop in the bucket for them. With this investment and the loads of U.S employees they have I would be surprised if they leave their large (largest?) user base.
- WhatIsAModel 2y ago
  This they can actually sell, plenty of fulfillment companies that would be interested in buying. They aren't selling their tech though and I don't blame them, Facebook wouldn't sell to be in China so whatever. However, I am disappointed because we aren't China and shouldn't govern the same. I personally will be voting for any non incumbent going forward (for my remaining time in this country, I'm getting out of here), the current legislature on both sides is insane, dangerous and (obviously) slowly creeping up the road of fascism.
  - takeda 2y ago
    There's a great book that I think everyone should read: "On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century" by Tim Snyder, it's also is short and to the point (audiobook is 2 hours long) and teaches people what to look for to see when their country slides into authoritarianism and what to do to fight it. The author also reads it on YouTube if you can't get a hold of it.
galdosdi 2y ago
I am baffled that any thoughtful person would take a CEO statement at face value without considering incentives. 1) prior to bill passage, convincing the public that they will pull out is optimal as it helps argue against bill, regardless of whether it is at all true 2) but, after bill passage, the incentives are totally different. Pulling out means giving up a billion dollar market that could instead have been sold. The shareholders would be livid. So I am very skeptical. I have heard CEOs say many things they later were found to clearly never have meant seriously, simply because it was what they needed to say at the time. Like, "we would never do outsourcing or layoffs, your division is totally safe".... I would think thoughtful HN readers would be just a little less credulous
- takeda 2y ago
  Exactly, if they pull out it only means that the fear that it was meant only for propaganda was well justified.
  - Thiez 2y ago
    That does not follow at all. Perhaps they simply don't want to spin off a future competitor, and decide that selling simply isn't worth that future risk.
    - galdosdi 2y ago
      That would be delusional, since TikTok's success is due to first-mover advantage due to network effects, not any hard to replicate technology or other real moat. They can imagine otherwise but that is just stroking their own egos. They were the first popular short-form algorithmic addictive feed app. Anyone can make one now (YT Shorts, Insta Reels, etc), there's no secret sauce anymore like there may have been years ago. But TikTok stays number one because they were number one -- network effects. If they disappear, a new competitor takes over and is just as strong as they were. All the value is in the niche, not the occupant of the niche. It really would be like they're giving it away instead of at least collecting a few billion cash for it. It would be monumentally stupid. They'd get the future competitor just as much whether they sell or not.
throwawayq3423 2y ago
> China lists algorithms and AI models trained on citizen data as a non-export Isn't this just another reason to conclude China views Tiktok as a national security asset?
disgruntledphd2 2y ago
The really funny part about all that is that those bans were a reaction to the last time the US tried to ban TikTok.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

wmf 2y ago

So not only does TikTok have to be sold but they also have to remove the addiction algorithm? This deal just gets better and better!

beezlebroxxxxxx 2y ago
> they also have to remove the addiction algorithm Whoever they sell it to, if they end up doing that, is going to be more than willing to put in place their own addiction algorithm, in just the same way that American social media and other adjacent tech companies have implemented them. I'm in no way a fan or user of TikTok, but thinking this will improve the app seems naive.
- shrimp_emoji 2y ago
  Not really. A Facebook or Twitter-esque addiction algorithm is WAY better than a CCP addiction algorithm since the latter tries to socially engineer unrest and disillusion, on purpose, as a targeted act of Nakatomi-esque cyberwarfare against a totalitarian regime's rivals. The former kind maybe does so as an inadvertent externality, and with every reason to wager to a far lesser degree. Meta won't turn up the heat on antisemitism and down on something the CCP doesn't like. It might turn up the heat on, I don't know, trans rights, and down on neo Nazis, but it's much more benign dystopic info filtering than an actual "what will destabilize the US and fuel stochastic terrorism and civil war?" agenda (which is against Meta's best interest).
  - interactivecode 2y ago
    The US social media seems to be encouraging nationalism and conservatism. Which Im also not to happy about. It seems to be creating more unrest in the west rather than strength progress and unity. China might not even need to influence the west through tiktok, meta and friends seem to be doing plenty of it themselves. None of it seem to be making us progress forward tbh
    - shrimp_emoji 2y ago
      I give TikTok negative benefit of the doubt though. Nobody can prove if the stream of craziness is organic or a result of Chinese propagandists tuning the algorithm, but I'll believe it's the latter every time. Could I even afford not to? It's just game theory at this point. > None of it seem to be making us progress forward tbh The Nirvana Fallacy is when you reject the better of two outcomes because it's not good enough compared to some mythical optimum. In this case, the optimum could be some social media service that "strengthens progress and unity" or it could be a total ban on social media altogether, both of which seem pretty mythical. :p I believe organic, chaotic derangement is better than extrinsic, targeted derangement in magnitude and outcome.
      - woooooo 2y ago
        This comment has almost brought me around to supporting a tiktok ban just to remove a leg from the conspiracy theories. Take some responsibility for Americans posting on social media to other Americans, for the love of god.
      - lobochrome 2y ago
        Not sure why you're getting downvoted - but I think this is thoughtful and to the point. The highest ideal American SNS follow is profit. That will generate all kinds of externalities that might be bad for society. Still, at least so far, we've found it to be the least destructive optimization target in modern human history (vs. socialism). The CCP is clearly tuning the algorithm in the SNS under its control to limit topics it deems undesirable in its goal of an ideal society. Whoever thinks this isn't so bad hasn't experienced an authoritarian state personally or at least highly underestimates the pain and suffering one can inflict.
- mminer237 2y ago
  Having the US's primary rival, which runs massive disinformation campaigns, also opaquely control the content that US youth consume en masse seems worse than...just about any alternative. Someone like Facebook wants the algorithm to show addictive content that generally isn't super offensive to the average person. Someone like the CCP wants the algorithm to show addictive content that idealizes "socialism with Chinese characteristics" and increases division in Western countries.
  - Capricorn2481 2y ago
    > increases division in Western countries I'm not convinced anything on TikTok is more divisive than any other social media platform. And Reddit seems to be filled with a lot more tankies than other platforms.
  - sangnoir 2y ago
    > Having the US's primary rival, which runs massive disinformation campaigns, also opaquely control the content that US youth consume en masse seems worse than...just about any alternative How is it worse than making disseminating disinformation illegal? The law as written lays bare the true motivation - it's not about fighting disinformation ("inauthentic user activity" has been detected across all social networks for the purposes of disinformation). It almost certainly is about protecting American companies from competitors with better AI algorithms. The legislature has telegraphed that the tech/potential for abuse are not problems by themselves - ownership by a Chinese company is what they take issue with.
    - ladzoppelin 2y ago
      But why is that a bad thing, China has the same regulations on companies not Chinese? Its not "better" algorithms its "weaponized" algorithms designed for specific populations including its own population which I imagine are not as damaging then the ones applied to others. My point is, of course this will be banned if the US gov cannot benefit from it and considered a threat to certain people.
      - 2y ago
winternett 2y ago
I'm looking forward to more regulation of social media to be honest... All of the algorithms only end up working against the entertainment and educational factor of it all anyway. I'm thoroughly convinced that the social media mega-platforms have all moved out of algorithms to just pushing sponsored ads all day. Many of these ads repeat far too often every time I log in, and it's been making me want to ban all the apps anyway...
- EasyMark 2y ago
  I just don't we'll ever see bans of social media working in the USA if the company is from here, at least not for the next 15 years, SCOTUS will most likely shoot down any attempts to do any serious regulation of social media except for maybe people under 18.
  - intrasight 2y ago
    No social media company would stay in business without the under 18 demographic
- sangnoir 2y ago
  > I'm looking forward to more regulation of social media to be honest I'm afraid that's not goign to happen in the US. Politicians never let a disaster go to waste: had the will been there to regulate social media in general, the hysteria around TikTok would have precipitated it. Instead, we got a law specifically targeting TikTok and ignoring other SM.
  - winternett 2y ago
    Facebook & Instagram have had tons of Congressional scrutiny over the past decade, the problem is they never really did much to fix issues with the platform as a result. The mere fact that these social media CEOs are building vast bunkers and amassing billions of dollars highlights the issue that they are literally shoveling value out of these platforms into their own pockets, and those of their investors, while preying upon the instincts of all their users in a deeply psychological manner.
EasyMark 2y ago
nah, that would be left up to tiktok, the CCP, and the buyer of the company, if there ever is a buyer and the CCP would even permit it.
- cryoes 2y ago
  [flagged]
astrea 2y ago
Good thing it’s only those evil Chinese making algorithms such as this /s
BobbyTables2 2y ago
Remove the addiction algorithm? You mean like Facebook, YouTube, and Starbucks? Riiiggghhhttt…
- saintfire 2y ago
  Coffeebourne addiction algorithms?
seanmcdirmid 2y ago
Google and Meta already have plenty of TikTok-style videos with addictive algorithms, so I don't think we will be much better off if TikTok leaves the market. Kids will just migrate to other competitors.
- galdosdi 2y ago
  Yeah. Google won this war already by getting Chromebooks into schools, which are mandatorily tied to a Gsuite account and thus have YouTube Shorts, drive, Gmail, etc access. As a parent, I hate google a lot more than TikTok. I can already block TikTok, but I can't block youtube because the school district mandates it.
  - seanmcdirmid 2y ago
    They don't need chromebooks in schools, my kid uses YouTube kids at home (that doesn't include shorts), teens will have their own phone usually, and youtube is already a popular place for them to go, discovering YouTube shorts (if they haven't already), is easy. But ya, if a teen is otherwise cut off from devices besides the ones they get from school, then you could see that as a weak point, although I don't think that applies to a significant portion of families. For the ones that it does apply to, they probably have bigger problems to worry about than TikTok being banned.
  - k12sosse 2y ago
    The admins should be able to block YouTube for minors when asked. There's a way to do it but it's by OU not individual user. Fight for it if you want it.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- jonesn11 2y ago
  The algorithm's novelty and recommendation accuracy is so far beyond what other competitors like Google, Snapchat, and Meta have that this seems like a coordinated effort by the private sector to push forth their mediocre products and centralize social media service which I absolutely DETEST. Mark Zuckerberg has publicly announced how far behind Tiktok Meta was. Many years later they are still playing catchup. Though, the saddest thing is that it seems like the U.S citizens, (i.e ANY of tiktoks 160 MILLION US users) have absolutely no say in the operations,a yet we actually interact with the app not these old people in Congress. The fact that Biden so swiftly signed the bill too makes me frustrated as I want to vote for him, but he keeps doing or okaying things that are counter to my values.

jorblumesea 2y ago

Kind of reinforces the allegations of being CCP owned and compromised and not an independent entity. If you have poison pill provisions.

RIMR 2y ago
There are plenty of US companies that are authorized to use government-funded patents, that would prevent them from transferring ownership to foreign owners. This isn't a "poison pill" conspiracy, this is standard export control for state-funded technology.
- riversflow 2y ago
  Any non-arms companies in that mix?
  - throwawaymaths 2y ago
    Merck (not an arms company) was expropriated from Merck.
    - riversflow 2y ago
      From the Germans, during WWI.
      - throwawaymaths 2y ago
        Yeah sure. At least WWI Germany wasn't committing two genocides.
- jorblumesea 2y ago
  Companies that are export controlled have military tech. The idea that a social media app would have a poison pill for export control is ridiculous and shows how owned these supposedly independent companies really are.

EasyMark 2y ago

They could work on a "good enough" algorithm that is basically already in public/open source domain when they sell it. 80% of its value is captive audience and "cool factor" with younger users.

Vegenoid 2y ago

Of course the CEO is going to say that, because they don't want the law passed. When the chips are down, it's a lot less likely that just pull out than that they take the money from one of the many salivating buyers.

RIMR 2y ago
If TikTok is in bed with the CCP as much as Congress says they are, think about the actual cause and effect of their different options. If ByteDance sells TikTok to US owners to satisfy the requirement, they give up control of a successful platform developed inside of China to a self-declared adversary that already controls most of the world's social media platforms, representing a significant loss to China as they attempt to compete online. If ByteDance ignores the demand to sell, the US government has obligated itself to prevent its citizens from accessing one of the most popular social media apps in existence, something that the affected users will be extremely angry about, and will likely make claims of state censorship. If I were China, and my goal was to leverage TikTok to do harm to America, I would choose the option that turns US citizens against the government over the option that transfers power from China to the US.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- Workaccount2 2y ago
  Tiktok isn't in bed with the CCP, it is the CCP. China is a communist country. State owned industry. The leash they give business "owners" might be long (long enough to fool westerns it's just another USA), but it is still a leash, and they are still under control of the party. No courts, no rights, no lawsuits. Party wants, party takes.
- djur 2y ago
  Isn't the obvious alternative "split TikTok and sell TikTok USA"?
  - takeda 2y ago

mandeepj 2y ago

> The CEO has mentioned that they will simply pull out of the US market. Nope! He has said - TT is not going anywhere and vows to fight back legally. I was a bit shocked to find court put a hold on Trump’s ban of TT

throwawaymaths 2y ago
He'll lose, since the US already has done this sort of thing. Very big example: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merck_%26_Co https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merck_%26_Co.

kromem 2y ago

Theoretically they could sell "TikTok" to a US company who then licenses algorithm processing to the Chinese entity, no? The US entity isn't beholden to the CCP and can decide to switch algorithm providers if they suddenly notice it's getting very propaganda-y, which provides a degree of independent oversight appeasing US concerns while not necessitating actually switching from the current systems.

djur 2y ago
The law requires the President (i.e. executive agencies) to verify any such transaction, and it specifically calls out "cooperation with respect to the operation of a content recommendation algorithm or an agreement with respect to data sharing" as subject to review. So they thought about that.
dbbk 2y ago
"TikTok" in the US is already a US-based company in LA.

togg 2y ago

As I understand TikTok has been investing in building out a U.S. fulfillment center network over the past two years, perhaps a drop in the bucket for them. With this investment and the loads of U.S employees they have I would be surprised if they leave their large (largest?) user base.

WhatIsAModel 2y ago
This they can actually sell, plenty of fulfillment companies that would be interested in buying. They aren't selling their tech though and I don't blame them, Facebook wouldn't sell to be in China so whatever. However, I am disappointed because we aren't China and shouldn't govern the same. I personally will be voting for any non incumbent going forward (for my remaining time in this country, I'm getting out of here), the current legislature on both sides is insane, dangerous and (obviously) slowly creeping up the road of fascism.
- takeda 2y ago
  There's a great book that I think everyone should read: "On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century" by Tim Snyder, it's also is short and to the point (audiobook is 2 hours long) and teaches people what to look for to see when their country slides into authoritarianism and what to do to fight it. The author also reads it on YouTube if you can't get a hold of it.

galdosdi 2y ago

I am baffled that any thoughtful person would take a CEO statement at face value without considering incentives. 1) prior to bill passage, convincing the public that they will pull out is optimal as it helps argue against bill, regardless of whether it is at all true 2) but, after bill passage, the incentives are totally different. Pulling out means giving up a billion dollar market that could instead have been sold. The shareholders would be livid. So I am very skeptical. I have heard CEOs say many things they later were found to clearly never have meant seriously, simply because it was what they needed to say at the time. Like, "we would never do outsourcing or layoffs, your division is totally safe".... I would think thoughtful HN readers would be just a little less credulous

takeda 2y ago
Exactly, if they pull out it only means that the fear that it was meant only for propaganda was well justified.
- Thiez 2y ago
  That does not follow at all. Perhaps they simply don't want to spin off a future competitor, and decide that selling simply isn't worth that future risk.
  - galdosdi 2y ago
    That would be delusional, since TikTok's success is due to first-mover advantage due to network effects, not any hard to replicate technology or other real moat. They can imagine otherwise but that is just stroking their own egos. They were the first popular short-form algorithmic addictive feed app. Anyone can make one now (YT Shorts, Insta Reels, etc), there's no secret sauce anymore like there may have been years ago. But TikTok stays number one because they were number one -- network effects. If they disappear, a new competitor takes over and is just as strong as they were. All the value is in the niche, not the occupant of the niche. It really would be like they're giving it away instead of at least collecting a few billion cash for it. It would be monumentally stupid. They'd get the future competitor just as much whether they sell or not.

throwawayq3423 2y ago

> China lists algorithms and AI models trained on citizen data as a non-export Isn't this just another reason to conclude China views Tiktok as a national security asset?

disgruntledphd2 2y ago

The really funny part about all that is that those bans were a reaction to the last time the US tried to ban TikTok.