5 ms·

Tiktok is obviously a massive national security risk, and I find it funny people don't see that. It is extremely well established that propaganda has great val

Tiktok is obviously a massive national security risk, and I find it funny people don't see that. It is extremely well established that propaganda has great value, and so allowing a foreign adversary the capacity to potentially control the information your citizens receive in a clandestine way is insanely dangerous.

the_sleaze_ 2y ago
Reddit is the exact same - just a propaganda machine
- redactd 2y ago
  I disagree. While I think there are definitely biases on Reddit, there is a difference between users, individual moderators, or even established sub policies having a political leaning versus an algorithmically masked propaganda machine like TikTok. Call me old fashion, but I put more faith in a profit seeking US company (recently public) with light government oversight than a foreign owned black box.
  - barbazoo 2y ago
    You might be missing the fact that there is a significant amount of bots on Reddit pushing certain agendas giving the impression they're foreign sponsored.
    - redactd 2y ago
      you may be right that there is a, "significant amount of bots on Reddit pushing certain agendas". However, Reddit is fundamentally designed to incentivize authentic engagement and to punish bots. If it wasn't the case before is certainly is now given the fact that they are now extracting value from the authenticity of data on their platform via AI Training data sales. Reddit is fiduciarily encouraged to tamp down bots and spam because they are financially incentivized to have the most genuine data. All of that aside it is irrelevant because we are talking about third parties (users/bots) pushing propaganda vs the platform owner itself pushing propaganda.
  - NooneAtAll3 2y ago
    I'd vouch for fake-ness of political Reddit as well it's easier to see phrasing and logical inconsistencies when you don't share the opinion that gets forced, sadly
  - the_sleaze_ 2y ago
    You disagree - try this. Go to the "popular" feed and take a scroll. I compel you to find one single positive post about capitalism or the west. Count the number of anti-capitalist or blatant pro-ccp content posts. One such - "Luigis game is about to be multiplayer" (reference to the recent murder of the insurance company ceo) with a video with the label "y'all look how the chinese are living" (compared to usa) You also say you put faith in a profit seeking US company. Reddit is not a USA owned company.
advisedwang 2y ago
Yes, we should also forbid books published by Chinese publishing companies because the CPC might pressure those companies to put propaganda in the books. We should also forbid Hollywood from selling movies in China, because as we've already seen that means the movies are being adjusted to get approval in China. We should also forbid Chinese citizens talking to Americans, because they might convince Americans on a topic we don't can't allow American minds to be changed about.
- barbazoo 2y ago
  The first two don't apply because they don't share the hyper personalized nature of social media. No two people see the same thing so it's impossible to react to foreign propaganda. Books and movies don't work that way. Third example is irrelevant because it's impossible to achieve the efficiency (reach) that social media has.
  - mightyham 2y ago
    I don't really see your point. Tiktok is a video library. With the exception of private videos, anything hosted on the app can be viewed by anyone. Whether or not the app provides a personalized algorithmic selection of videos does not have any bearing on the more fundamental question of whether American's have the right to access foreign media.
    - tevon 2y ago
      Of course it's relevant. TikTok should be considered a broadcaster. We have not allowed foreign ownership of a broadcaster since 1934. A book does not broadcast in the same way.
      - mightyham 2y ago
        Since when are social media apps considered broadcasters? In fact, section 230 legally protects social media apps from the civil liabilities of broadcasting. You're also just distracting from the actual issue. Being that, as citizens of a democratic republic promoting free speech, press, association, etc., do you think we have a right to view foreign media (including broadcasts for that matter)?
barbazoo 2y ago
> It is extremely well established that propaganda has great value, and so allowing a foreign adversary the capacity to potentially control the information your citizens receive in a clandestine way is insanely dangerous. I would say that allowing a ~foreign adversary~ anyone the capacity to potentially control the information your citizens receive in a clandestine way is insanely dangerous. Why do we let domestic ones do it? We're seeing what they're doing to our societies.
crimsoneer 2y ago
It would have been farcically easy to legislate that any large social media company have to expose their algorithm to a regulator, with a capacity for spot checks and immense sanctions if they fail to comply. If your argument is "we can't allow any foreign owned social media to operate in the US", then how can you possible argue that the rest of the world should allow American applications?
- corimaith 2y ago
  >If your argument is "we can't allow any foreign owned social media to operate in the US", then how can you possible argue that the rest of the world should allow American applications? Are they not free to ban it if they wish? But they won't because contrary to what some people would like to push, the CCP in fact is alot more sinister than the US Government, and foreigners do recognize that in genuine security analysis.
NooneAtAll3 2y ago
the problem is that similar efforts in other countries have been criticized as "internet censorship" either Russia and Indonesia are in the right - or US is in the wrong
iforgot22 2y ago
Allowing the government to control the information its citizens receive is dangerous.
sangnoir 2y ago
I think the American government is contorting its public argument to avoid saying this plainly because there are many American companies that control information for most of the world, and they don't want other countries to go "Hmm, hang on a minute..."
whatwhaaaaat 2y ago
National security risk to which nation? The kids on TikTok seem to understand pretty well why it all the sudden was wrongthink.
ossobuco 2y ago
Can you provide examples of China controlled propaganda happening on Tiktok? Things that are factually true don't count, obviously.
corimaith 2y ago
They do see it, they just support that very foreign adversary (or may even be such adversaries).
hxegon 2y ago
Can you, someone, anyone in this toxic wasteland of a thread please point out what propaganda you're talking about? Point to an actual thing that justifies banning something 140M Americans use daily and don't just expound upon your vague national security paranoia.
- deepfriedrice 2y ago
  "Where are the examples" is a straw man. Imagine the ways a political enemy might exploit limitless access to the attention of 140M Americans. The calculus seems to be that a false negative will be much more catastrophic than a false positive.
  - hxegon 2y ago
    I understand what you're saying but that argument I don't think should apply here. Having some kind of evidence to back up a drastic action like this is not something that should be argued for, it should be a given. I've asked at least 5 different times for people to point to anything material, and no one has come up with anything. I'm not saying there is no threat, I could be wrong and there could be a massive threat, but if there is one shouldn't we be able to point to something more than "it could happen" and being paranoid about it? I'm being asked to have faith in institutions/politicians that have a long, long, long proven track record of not having my best interests at heart and I can't accept that when they have clear conflicting interests / motives.
- madebylaw 2y ago
  Why does the ban need to be reactive for you to understand it?
thuanao 2y ago
What do you mean national security risk? What risk to whom, exactly? Do you mean that the algorithm can portray communism or China in a positive light? Can you provide an example video that constitutes this threat?
mileycyrusXOXO 2y ago
"The internet is obviously a massive national security risk, and I find it funny people don't see that" "Libraries are obviously a massive national security risk, and I find it funny people don't see that."

the_sleaze_ 2y ago

Reddit is the exact same - just a propaganda machine

redactd 2y ago
I disagree. While I think there are definitely biases on Reddit, there is a difference between users, individual moderators, or even established sub policies having a political leaning versus an algorithmically masked propaganda machine like TikTok. Call me old fashion, but I put more faith in a profit seeking US company (recently public) with light government oversight than a foreign owned black box.
- barbazoo 2y ago
  You might be missing the fact that there is a significant amount of bots on Reddit pushing certain agendas giving the impression they're foreign sponsored.
  - redactd 2y ago
    you may be right that there is a, "significant amount of bots on Reddit pushing certain agendas". However, Reddit is fundamentally designed to incentivize authentic engagement and to punish bots. If it wasn't the case before is certainly is now given the fact that they are now extracting value from the authenticity of data on their platform via AI Training data sales. Reddit is fiduciarily encouraged to tamp down bots and spam because they are financially incentivized to have the most genuine data. All of that aside it is irrelevant because we are talking about third parties (users/bots) pushing propaganda vs the platform owner itself pushing propaganda.
- NooneAtAll3 2y ago
  I'd vouch for fake-ness of political Reddit as well it's easier to see phrasing and logical inconsistencies when you don't share the opinion that gets forced, sadly
- the_sleaze_ 2y ago
  You disagree - try this. Go to the "popular" feed and take a scroll. I compel you to find one single positive post about capitalism or the west. Count the number of anti-capitalist or blatant pro-ccp content posts. One such - "Luigis game is about to be multiplayer" (reference to the recent murder of the insurance company ceo) with a video with the label "y'all look how the chinese are living" (compared to usa) You also say you put faith in a profit seeking US company. Reddit is not a USA owned company.

advisedwang 2y ago

Yes, we should also forbid books published by Chinese publishing companies because the CPC might pressure those companies to put propaganda in the books. We should also forbid Hollywood from selling movies in China, because as we've already seen that means the movies are being adjusted to get approval in China. We should also forbid Chinese citizens talking to Americans, because they might convince Americans on a topic we don't can't allow American minds to be changed about.

barbazoo 2y ago
The first two don't apply because they don't share the hyper personalized nature of social media. No two people see the same thing so it's impossible to react to foreign propaganda. Books and movies don't work that way. Third example is irrelevant because it's impossible to achieve the efficiency (reach) that social media has.
- mightyham 2y ago
  I don't really see your point. Tiktok is a video library. With the exception of private videos, anything hosted on the app can be viewed by anyone. Whether or not the app provides a personalized algorithmic selection of videos does not have any bearing on the more fundamental question of whether American's have the right to access foreign media.
  - tevon 2y ago
    Of course it's relevant. TikTok should be considered a broadcaster. We have not allowed foreign ownership of a broadcaster since 1934. A book does not broadcast in the same way.
    - mightyham 2y ago
      Since when are social media apps considered broadcasters? In fact, section 230 legally protects social media apps from the civil liabilities of broadcasting. You're also just distracting from the actual issue. Being that, as citizens of a democratic republic promoting free speech, press, association, etc., do you think we have a right to view foreign media (including broadcasts for that matter)?

barbazoo 2y ago

> It is extremely well established that propaganda has great value, and so allowing a foreign adversary the capacity to potentially control the information your citizens receive in a clandestine way is insanely dangerous. I would say that allowing a ~foreign adversary~ anyone the capacity to potentially control the information your citizens receive in a clandestine way is insanely dangerous. Why do we let domestic ones do it? We're seeing what they're doing to our societies.

crimsoneer 2y ago

It would have been farcically easy to legislate that any large social media company have to expose their algorithm to a regulator, with a capacity for spot checks and immense sanctions if they fail to comply. If your argument is "we can't allow any foreign owned social media to operate in the US", then how can you possible argue that the rest of the world should allow American applications?

corimaith 2y ago
>If your argument is "we can't allow any foreign owned social media to operate in the US", then how can you possible argue that the rest of the world should allow American applications? Are they not free to ban it if they wish? But they won't because contrary to what some people would like to push, the CCP in fact is alot more sinister than the US Government, and foreigners do recognize that in genuine security analysis.

NooneAtAll3 2y ago

the problem is that similar efforts in other countries have been criticized as "internet censorship" either Russia and Indonesia are in the right - or US is in the wrong

iforgot22 2y ago

Allowing the government to control the information its citizens receive is dangerous.

sangnoir 2y ago

I think the American government is contorting its public argument to avoid saying this plainly because there are many American companies that control information for most of the world, and they don't want other countries to go "Hmm, hang on a minute..."

whatwhaaaaat 2y ago

National security risk to which nation? The kids on TikTok seem to understand pretty well why it all the sudden was wrongthink.

ossobuco 2y ago

Can you provide examples of China controlled propaganda happening on Tiktok? Things that are factually true don't count, obviously.

corimaith 2y ago

They do see it, they just support that very foreign adversary (or may even be such adversaries).

hxegon 2y ago

Can you, someone, anyone in this toxic wasteland of a thread please point out what propaganda you're talking about? Point to an actual thing that justifies banning something 140M Americans use daily and don't just expound upon your vague national security paranoia.

deepfriedrice 2y ago
"Where are the examples" is a straw man. Imagine the ways a political enemy might exploit limitless access to the attention of 140M Americans. The calculus seems to be that a false negative will be much more catastrophic than a false positive.
- hxegon 2y ago
  I understand what you're saying but that argument I don't think should apply here. Having some kind of evidence to back up a drastic action like this is not something that should be argued for, it should be a given. I've asked at least 5 different times for people to point to anything material, and no one has come up with anything. I'm not saying there is no threat, I could be wrong and there could be a massive threat, but if there is one shouldn't we be able to point to something more than "it could happen" and being paranoid about it? I'm being asked to have faith in institutions/politicians that have a long, long, long proven track record of not having my best interests at heart and I can't accept that when they have clear conflicting interests / motives.
madebylaw 2y ago
Why does the ban need to be reactive for you to understand it?

thuanao 2y ago

What do you mean national security risk? What risk to whom, exactly? Do you mean that the algorithm can portray communism or China in a positive light? Can you provide an example video that constitutes this threat?

mileycyrusXOXO 2y ago

"The internet is obviously a massive national security risk, and I find it funny people don't see that" "Libraries are obviously a massive national security risk, and I find it funny people don't see that."