10 ms·

TikTok is perhaps the most impressively addictive social media app ever created. The algorithm used in the US was apparently banned in China for being too addic

TikTok is perhaps the most impressively addictive social media app ever created. The algorithm used in the US was apparently banned in China for being too addictive. There's a certain historic symmetry with how opium was traditionally used in China, then Britain introduced stronger, more disruptive versions, forcing a stronger social reaction. Geopolitics aside, I think everyone is kind of aware that social media is a vice, and like it or not, this could just be the beginning of our society beginning to scrutinize these platforms.

ternnoburn 2y ago
I wish it were a reckoning for social media, but reading here shows there's plenty of people here who are passionate about "China bad" and see this only through that one lens. And they seem to think it is strictly about TikTok.
- epolanski 2y ago
  As an European citizen I'm very uneasy with US-based services having my data and I nuked everything from ages bar LinkedIn and HN. The hard part is de-googling.
  - krunck 2y ago
    > The hard part is de-googling. But it's worth the effort.
  - pc86 2y ago
    The is a completely legitimate and not uncommon viewpoint. But is it relevant in the context of this thread?
    - miroljub 2y ago
      Yes. What is China for Americans, for us Europeans, is the USA. Some argue that it's even worse for Europeans because the Chinese military and government can't reach you while in the USA. And there is no safe place for Europeans from the US government, unless they move to China or Russia.
      - catlikesshrimp 2y ago
        As I understood your post: You said the US is worse because "Europeans" are willing to relocate to the US. And also that China is better because they are not likely to relocate to neither Russia nor China. Is that correct?
        akovaski 2y ago
        This is an incorrect understanding of what they wrote. It's not about Europeans relocating to the US or Americans relocating to China. They're saying (that other people are saying) that in the US, you are safe from the Chinese government/military. In the EU, you are not safe from the US government/military. Also note that the claim is not that the US is worse than China for Europeans. The claim is that the US is worse for Europeans than China is for Americans. The last part about relocating is saying that you can only be safe from the US government/military in China or Russia. Based on extradition agreements, this conclusion seems true enough on the surface. And maybe US military bases in Europe play a role as well. But this is a thread about national security concerns via social media, and I think it's hard to make a broad and definitive conclusion due to the wide variety of soft and hard powers that countries exert internationally.
      - epolanski 2y ago
        I think that it's a bit overblown. But it's a problem when your biggest ally treats you like an ally, says you're living off him militarily and spies/hacks you non stop. China is not a military threat to Europe, it's literally on the other part of the globe. It's only a threat to US geopolitical ambitions.
      - zeroonetwothree 2y ago
        Oh come on. The US is in a military alliance with most of Europe. And hasn’t banned any European apps from operating. And has similar democratic and human rights policies.
        herbst 2y ago
        > And has similar democratic and human rights policies. In Europe we have some direct and some less direct democracy and human rights that a really apply without any Guantanamo exceptions. When there are issues there are laws made, not singular platforms banned. It's not similar and offensive to say so.
  - jagermo 2y ago
    even harder is finding a payment system that is not US-based and broadly accepted (no, not crypto). I do have some hopes for a digital euro and, maybe, maybe, even Wero. But i fear it will never take off because too many players are involved and there is no clear marketing strategy to get it to people. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wero_(payment) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wero_(payment)
    - herbst 2y ago
      Why not crypto? It's exactly that and works pretty well
      - jagermo 2y ago
        It does not. Its volatile, its backed by some at least as shady companies, rugpulls are constant, the acceptance rate of crypto is way below Mastercard/Visa or even Amex, you need to have at least a charged phone and and and. Sorry, I don't see any available version of crypto replacing MC or Visa.
epolanski 2y ago
I don't understand the argument here, Tik Tok would maximize their monetization in US but not in other markets? I don't buy it.
- mywittyname 2y ago
  Think of it like consumer protection laws - Ford has higher safety requirements for the vehicles they sell domestically than they do for those sold in Mexico. Thus, it could be argued that they are not maximizing their monetization of the US market by cutting out expensive safety features that consumers don't pay extra for. China is wise to have such laws to protect their citizens.
- legitster 2y ago
  Corporations in China all operate at the behest of "the people" (aka the party). If the government thinks a product is damaging or harmful to society, it can be taken off the market without any legal mechanisms necessary.
  - bdndndndbve 2y ago
    Unlike in America where... they say it's a national security threat and vote to remove it?
    - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
      > they say it's a national security threat and vote to remove it? From app stores and American hosting. Only if Bytedance doesn’t sell TikTok to e.g. a French or Indian or American owner. TikTok.com will still resolve (unless Bytedance blocks it). China literally blocks information.
    - BugsJustFindMe 2y ago
      Only the control by a foreign adversary part is being threatened in the US, not the algorithmic opium part twisting the minds of the population. They're two different things. The US so far has no qualms with it if an American is in control of the strings. That's where China differs.
wumeow 2y ago
I remember trying out TikTok and realizing in horror that it was a slot machine for video content.
- se4u 2y ago
  Have you seen YouTube shorts and Instagram reels. Lol
  - wumeow 2y ago
    They copied TikTok.
  - dpkirchner 2y ago
    I don't know about Shorts but Instagram has solved the addiction problem by ignoring signals like the user tapping "not interested" or scrolling past videos quickly. They just show junk.
yellow_lead 2y ago
> The algorithm used in the US was apparently banned in China for being too addictive. Source? I could only find this. https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/03/08/1069527/china-tiktok-douyin-teens-privacy/ https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/03/08/1069527/china-ti...
- afavour 2y ago
  > That same year, Douyin imposed a 40-minute daily limit for users under 14. Last year, Chinese regulators introduced a rule that would limit children under age 18 to two hours of smartphone screen time each day. https://abcnews.go.com/Business/tiktok-china/story?id=108111708 https://abcnews.go.com/Business/tiktok-china/story?id=108111...
  - p_j_w 2y ago
    That’s not at all the same as banning the algorithm.
    - andy_xor_andrew 2y ago
      Maybe the "community notes" model isn't so bad after all
    - afavour 2y ago
      It’s not the same, no. I provided the link because it’s what I assume the OP is referring to. Limiting use to 40 minutes is not a ban but it still shows a view that extended exposure to it is harmful. To turn it on its head, if more than 40 minutes is viewed harmful for Chinese youth, why not American?
      - jfdbcv 2y ago
        You know they did that with video games too.. Should we do that here? https://apnews.com/article/gaming-business-children-00db669defcc8e0ca1fc2dc54120a0b8 https://apnews.com/article/gaming-business-children-00db669d...
ritcgab 2y ago
> The algorithm used in the US was apparently banned in China for being too addictive. Source?
- cj 2y ago
  TikTok itself is banned in mainland china. Do you need much more of a source? Yes, you could say Douyin is available in place of TikTok, but have you asked yourself why they have 2 separate apps? One for mainland China, and another for everyone else? Another source (see the section "How is Douyin different from TikTok?"): https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/25/business/china-tiktok-douyin.html https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/25/business/china-tiktok-dou...
  - yyhhsj0521 2y ago
    So is Wikipedia. Otherwise Chinese people just cannot stop reading all those wiki pages about that fungi that only grow on a certain volcano in French New Guinea. How addictive!
  - jfdbcv 2y ago
    Isn't this comment quite reductive? There are many reasons why there are two separate apps and not necessarily related to how addictive the algorithm is. The "source" you linked gives one such reason: > Like other social media services in China, Douyin follows the censorship rules of the Chinese Communist Party. It conscientiously removes video pertaining to topics deemed sensitive or inflammatory by the party, although it has proved a little harder than text-based social media to control. Also have you used Douyin? It's really feels like basically the same thing.
- miroljub 2y ago
  >> The algorithm used in the US was apparently banned in China for being too addictive. > Source? The same source as everything Covid related: Trust me, bro.
  - kccoder 2y ago
    > Trust me, bro. Are you referring to the completely scientifically-untrained "bros" who were touting ivermectin and other treatments or cures with little to no scientific evidence of efficacy?
stonesthrowaway 2y ago
> TikTok is perhaps the most impressively addictive social media app ever created. What nonsense. > The algorithm used in the US was apparently banned in China for being too addictive. "Apparently"? Tiktok was forced to separate itself into a chinese version and the non-chinese version by the US because we didn't want "da ccp" controlling tiktok. > There's a certain historic symmetry with how opium was traditionally used in China, then Britain introduced stronger, more disruptive versions, forcing a stronger social reaction. There is no historic symmetry. Unless china invades the US and forces americans to use tiktok. Like britain invaded china ( opium wars ) and forced opium on china's population. What's with all the same propaganda in every tiktok/china related thread? The same talking points on every single thread for the past few years.
- hombre_fatal 2y ago
  What viewpoint is your use of “da ccp” supposed to disparage?
  - whateveracct 2y ago
    I think people (Americans) who view China as a geopolitical rival/enemy of the United States?
- herval 2y ago
  how did Britain force the Chinese population to consume Opium?
  - se4u 2y ago
    I don't know if you are just ignorant about history and unwilling to Google, or if you are making the point that of course British did not force feed opium to the people. What is very well established is that the british fought a war , literally called the opium war by Western historians themselves with the main objective of keeping their opium distribution into China open after the emperor banned it Their action was akin to if some majority owner of Purdue pharma invades US and forces US government to "keep the oxy market open" while letting "people make their own decision".
bigcat12345678 2y ago
> The algorithm used in the US was apparently banned in China for being too addictive. Apparently? What's the obvious about it?
jmyeet 2y ago
That might be true but it's irrelevant. Why? Because that's not the issue the government tackled. Arguing "national security" with (quite literally) secret evidence is laughable. Data protection too is a smokescreen or the government would've passed a comprehensive Federal data protection act, which they'd never do. It's hard to see how the government would tackle algorithmic addiction within running afoul of First Amendment issues. Such an effort should also apply to Meta and Google too if it were attempted. IMHO reciprocal market access was the most defensible position but wasn't the argument the government made. That being said, the government did make a strictly commerce-based argument to avoid free speech issues. As came up in oral arguments (and maybe the opinion?) this is functionally no different to the restrictions on foreign ownership of US media outlets.
Xenoamorphous 2y ago
Does anyone have any link to some docs explaining how it works?
- xnx 2y ago
  https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/05/business/media/tiktok-algorithm.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/05/business/media/tiktok-alg... Like Facebook, the "algorithm" is nothing special. TikTok made some smart design decisions that collect more interaction data that legacy social sites like Instagram and YouTube. They use that data to effectively recommend content.
xnx 2y ago
You could substitute anything you don't like (gambling, alcohol, gacha games, convenience foods, televised sports, reality TV) for "social media" in the above and it makes as much sense.
- dizzant 2y ago
  > TikTok is perhaps the most impressively addictive gambling app ever created. > Geopolitics aside, I think everyone is kind of aware that gambling is a vice, and like it or not, this could just be the beginning of our society beginning to scrutinize these platforms. Not really. TikTok isn't a gambling app.
  - iaseiadit 2y ago
    The comparison here is a slot machine: you pay a a few to play, you pull the lever to play, you win a prize. Here, the payment is your attention, you swipe to the next video to play the game, and the prize if you land on a good video is a small hit of dopamine.
  - cratermoon 2y ago
    It's a variable reward dopamine hit generator.
  - redwall_hp 2y ago
    Everyone's losing their collective mind about people watching videos on a platform not approved by our oligarchs, while there's an epidemic of people racking up gambling debt from the sudden prevalence of DraftKings and other mobile sports betting apps.
    - root-user 2y ago
      At least in circles I frequent, people are pretty upset with the state of sports betting too. Feels like lots of things are pretty crappy these days, simultaneously
    - zeroonetwothree 2y ago
miroljub 2y ago
> Geopolitics aside, I think everyone is kind of aware that social media is a vice, and like it or not, this could just be the beginning of our society beginning to scrutinize these platforms. Come on. We all know that TikTok was banned because the US regime couldn't control it. If they really wanted to ban vice, they would have banned Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, YouTube, and their kin a long ago.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > TikTok was banned because the US regime couldn't control it The law is fine with TikTok being owned by a Nigerian.
  - miroljub 2y ago
    Well, Nigeria is or can be controlled by the USA. China is an independent country.
    - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
      > Nigeria is or can be controlled by the USA. China is an independent country Take a step back and consider how ridiculous this is. Every country in the world other than these six [1] is controlled by the U.S.? [1] https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-15/subtitle-B/chapter-VII/subchapter-E/part-791/subpart-A/section-791.4 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-15/subtitle-B/chapter-VII...
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
      - hnfong 2y ago
        That sounds about right.
  - sudosysgen 2y ago
    If it was owned by a Nigerian tomorrow and kept the same CEO, board, employees and algorithm, do you honestly think it wouldn't immediately be banned again?
ramoz 2y ago
Maybe it was just a genuine outlet for interconnected entertainment compared to other platforms. American's have always sought similar entertainment since the dawn of the 'couch potato.' Now we can go back to consuming curated narratives/influence on our good ole traditional grams and tubes.
keybored 2y ago
I think that’s besides the point given the entity that is banning it. It’s because it’s Chinese. An equally addictive Western-made app would not have been banned. And generally speaking as a culture we are too liberal to ban things for being too addictive. Again, showing that it is not relevant in this case since it will not inspire bans of other addictive (pseudo) substances on those grounds.
croes 2y ago
It’s not about the algorithm but about the owner of the platform. The same algorithm in US possession isn’t a problem.
- srameshc 2y ago
  Well said. Only if we start looking at both of these issues separately, owner and algorith and deal with each one appropriately.
- ehsankia 2y ago
  Indeed, it's all protectionism. They want the money to go to American companies instead. Why do you think the EU, which is generally far more aggressive about these things, has not yet banned TikTok? It's also the same reason Huawei are thriving elsewhere but banned in the US. It's all just trying to protect their big companies with deep pockets.
  - ruthmarx 2y ago
    EU is always slow. They felt browser choice was an issue 0 years after it stopped being one, and then freaked out about cookies also 10 more more years later when it wasn't really an issue. Data tracking is an issue, sure. Not cookies though, not anymore.
- wahnfrieden 2y ago
  It wouldn't be the same algorithm, it would suppress pro-Palestine content more aggressively as Meta does. The US's problem is with the algorithm
lolinder 2y ago
What needs to happen is that all of these platforms need to be straight up banned. TikTok is getting picked on because of its ties to China, but why is it better for Zuckerberg or Musk to have the capabilities that are so frightening in the hands of the CCP? The US social media billionaire class is ostensibly accountable to the law, but they're also perfectly capable of using their influence over these platforms to write the law. One plausible theory for why the politicians talk about fears of spying instead of the real fears of algorithmic manipulation is because they don't want to draw too much attention to how capable these media platforms are of manipulating voters, because they rely on those capabilities to get into and stay in power.
- tevon 2y ago
  Because if Zuck or Musk does something bad with said power, we can do something about it. We can't really jail the CCP. Additionally, Zuck and Musk don't have armies to back up their propaganda. We shouldn't let foreign powers own the means of broadcast...
  - walls 2y ago
    So what you're saying is, freedom of speech doesn't really work?
    - kccoder 2y ago
      Perhaps algorithmically weaponized "speech" by bad actors with bad intentions, especially controlled by adversaries, doesn't work, and was wholly unpredicted or accounted for by the founders.
  - jayknight 2y ago
    >Zuck and Musk don't have armies to back up their propaganda But they're about to have all three branches of government to back it up.
  - lolinder 2y ago
    Who is we, though? I can't do anything about it. Can you? The people who can do something about it are the people who are already in power in the US. They understandably don't want to share with the CCP, but most of them came to power by manipulating enough voters into voting for them. They stay in power by ensuring that enough voters continue to want to vote for them. Which means that someone like Zuckerberg or Musk has an insanely inordinate amount of influence over whether these people who are in power stay in power. Yes, I think it's marginally better that that influence remain out of the hands of the CCP, but I would rather that that influence not exist at all. It's too dangerous and too prone to corruption.
ksynwa 2y ago
> this could just be the beginning of our society beginning to scrutinize these platforms. Could not be more wrong. "Society" is not deciding anything here. The ban is entirely because of idelogical and geopolical reasons. They have already allowed the good big tech companies to get people hooked as much as they want. If you think you are going to see regulation for public good you will probably be disappointed.
- slt2021 2y ago
  agree, it was just a shakedown and money grab. some US oligarchs wanted to buy tiktok at deep discount while it was private, and make money off of making it public company
  - bko 2y ago
    Why would it be sold at a deep discount? About 45% of the US population uses TikTok and 63% of teens aged 13 to 17 report using TikTok, with 57% of them using the app daily Hell of a product, there would be a crazy bidding war for that kind of engagement
    - burnte 2y ago
      In a fire sale the seller has no leverage.
      - drexlspivey 2y ago
        The seller doesn't need any leverage if there are many interested buyers
        sulam 2y ago
        If you have to get a sale done, it will absolutely create a discount on the price. This is regardless of the interest — all parties know you have a time limit. Yes you may still do a sale quickly and the price may still be at a premium to your last funding round or whatever you want to use as a mark to market, but it will be at a discount to what you could have gotten.
next_xibalba 2y ago
From a geopolitical perspective, this issue about 3 items: 1) Influence- TikTok gives the CCP significant direct influence over the views of Americans. 2) Data- TikTok collects massive amounts of data on 100s of millions of Americans. Opens many avenues for spying, extortion of influence, etc. 3) Reciprocity- Foreign tech companies are essentially banned from operating in China. Much like with other industries, China is not playing fair, they’re playing to win. Insofar as TikTok has offered a “superior” product, this might be a story of social media and its double edge. But this far more a story of geopolitics.
- dmix 2y ago
  > TikTok collects massive amounts of data on 100s of millions of Americans. Opens many avenues for spying, extortion of influence, etc. you can buy all of that from data brokers
  - hwillis 2y ago
    It's not even about them: > If, for example, a user allows TikTok access to the user’s phone contact list to connect with others on the platform, TikTok can access “any data stored in the user’s contact list,” including names, contact information, contact photos, job titles, and notes. 2 id., at 659. Access to such detailed information about U. S. users, the Government worries, may enable “China to track the locations of Federal employees and contractors, build dossiers of personal information for blackmail, and conduct corporate espionage.” https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24-656_ca7d.pdf https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24-656_ca7d.pdf It seems farcically ridiculous to me to ban the app because it somehow could let china blackmail CEOs.
    - fidotron 2y ago
      They have had legit unintentional problems with apps like Strava: https://www.wired.com/story/strava-heat-map-military-bases-fitness-trackers-privacy/ https://www.wired.com/story/strava-heat-map-military-bases-f... What ZTE were up to was way more nefarious, but couldn't be done with just apps.
bastardoperator 2y ago
The government doesn't care about addictive anything, this is about control and access. If they cared about life or citizens in general they would fix healthcare and maybe introduce any kind of gun control. This is the same government that was slanging cocaine in the 1980's...
- wry_discontent 2y ago
  Multiple reps publicly said TikTok needed to be banned because they couldn't control the narrative around Gaza as easily. TikTok is the only platform I regularly see content about Gaza fed from the algorithm.
  - unethical_ban 2y ago
    I'd be interested in a source for that.
    - westernmostcoy 2y ago
      https://www.axios.com/local/salt-lake-city/2024/05/06/senator-romney-antony-blinken-tiktok-ban-israel-palestinian-content https://www.axios.com/local/salt-lake-city/2024/05/06/senato...
    - seventhtiger 2y ago
      https://www.thefp.com/p/tik-tok-young-americans-hamas-mike-gallag https://www.thefp.com/p/tik-tok-young-americans-hamas-mike-g... https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/11/13/tiktok-facebook-instagram-gaza-hastags/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/11/13/tiktok-... https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/mar/16/tiktok-ban-progressive-politics-activism https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/mar/16/tiktok... https://theintercept.com/2025/01/09/tiktok-ban-israel-palestine-republicans/ https://theintercept.com/2025/01/09/tiktok-ban-israel-palest... https://www.aljazeera.com/program/the-listening-post/2024/3/23/dissecting-the-tiktok-problem https://www.aljazeera.com/program/the-listening-post/2024/3/... https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/28/business/tiktok-israel-hamas-war-gaza.html https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/28/business/tiktok-israel-ha...
bigbacaloa 2y ago
[dead]
TheBigSalad 2y ago
I disagree that social media is a vice. There's nothing inherently wrong with better communication. Although it's hard for me to see the value (or appeal) in TikTok.
- ulbu 2y ago
  nothing inherently wrong with fentanyl either. not a strong argument.
- lolinder 2y ago
  What aspect of modern social media contributes to better communication? We're not taking about WhatsApp here, we're talking about algorithmic infinite scroll feeds.
  - TheBigSalad 2y ago
    Just on Facebook I can see what all of my old high school friends are up to. I can instantly send anyone a message. I can find things buy that people are selling. I have a community of people who are into the same obscure hobby. That's just off the top of my head.
PittleyDunkin 2y ago
> this could just be the beginning of our society beginning to scrutinize these platforms. I think politicians have scrutinized american social media and they're 100% fine with the misery they induce so long as they are personally enriched by them. > There's a certain historic symmetry with how opium was traditionally used in China TikTok isn't anywhere near as destructive as opium was. Hell, purely in terms of "mis/disinformation" surely facebook and twitter are many times worse than TikTok. Surely the appropriate modern parallel is fentanyl.
whiplash451 2y ago
I'm with you except for the last sentence. What's happening to TikTok is not a good proxy for the trajectory of social media companies in the US, esp Meta. They've got plenty of tailwind.
londons_explore 2y ago
> beginning to scrutinize these platforms. I think the government could fix it with a screen time limit. 30 mins for under 18's, and 1 hour for everyone else, per day. Maybe allow you to carry over some. After that, it's emergency calls only.
- Aurornis 2y ago
  It's still weird to me to see tech website comments calling for extreme government restrictions on technology use. Limiting adults to 1 hour of screen time per day across social apps? That's a call for an insane level of government intrusion into our lives that is virtually unheard of outside of extremely controlling governments.
  - londons_explore 2y ago
    less controlling than banning the software alltogether. The government bans plenty of activities. Taking illegal drugs. Murdering people. Fishing without a license. Investing in unregulated stocks, Etc. Why not addictive apps?
femiagbabiaka 2y ago
Americans have faced so little strife domestically that they're unironically comparing social media addiction to the Opium Wars
mhalle 2y ago
Note that the Supreme Court decided the argument based on national security grounds, not content manipulation grounds. Justice Gorsuch in his concurrence specifically commended the court for doing so, believing that a content manipulation argument could run afoul of first amendment rights. He said that "One man's covert content manipulation is another's editorial discretion".
- ranger_danger 2y ago
  Be that as it may, I think a large percentage of the opposition don't buy this natsec reasoning at all. You could use that excuse for anything, like mass surveillance via the Patriot Act... EFF's stance is that SCOTUS's decision based on national security ignores the First Amendment scrutiny that is required. > The United States’ foreign foes easily can steal, scrape, or buy Americans’ data by countless other means. The ban or forced sale of one social media app will do virtually nothing to protect Americans' data privacy – only comprehensive consumer privacy legislation can achieve that goal. Shutting down communications platforms or forcing their reorganization based on concerns of foreign propaganda and anti-national manipulation is an eminently anti-democratic tactic, one that the US has previously condemned globally.
  - accrual 2y ago
    I don't buy it either. Entire generations are growing up without expectations of digital privacy. Our data leaks everywhere, all the time, intentionally and otherwise. I think it's more about the fact that users of platform are able to connect and share their experiences and potential action for resolving class inequality. There's an entire narrative that is outside of US govt/corp/media control, and that's a problem (to them).
InTheArena 2y ago
China doesn't need Tiktok for opium. They have the real thing as well. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-fentanyl-pipeline-and-chinas-role-in-the-us-opioid-crisis/ https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-fentanyl-pipeline-and...
- warner25 2y ago
  The fentanyl pipeline is what came to my mind as well; another thing exported from China to the US to disastrous effect on the well-being of many Americans. To be fair, trying to consider the other way around, I wonder what Chinese people could point to as disastrous stuff (in terms of the well-being of their population) coming from the US.
  - herbst 2y ago
    What about America's role in the fentanyl issue? It's available all over Europe as well, but people still decide against it and so far it stays a very small mostly regional niche issue.
the_clarence 2y ago
Why are people upvoting this.
- liontwist 2y ago
  Internet loves those public school history fact references.
dylan604 2y ago
> I think everyone is kind of aware that social media is a vice I don't think this is true. Everyone that is reading this forum might even be too strong. The majority of people happily eating the pablum up as the users of TikTok can't even tell the blatantly false content from just the silly dancing videos.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
daryl_martis 2y ago
[flagged]
throwaway48476 2y ago
The symmetry for opium is fentanyl which China senda to the US by the ton.
blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
I think TikTok and social media in general is much more insidious than opium, because it is hard to know if you are using an addictive product, or what product you’re even being sold (like if you are being sold a subtly manipulated information diet). For example, it just came out that TikTok staff (in the US) were forced to take oaths of loyalty to not disrupt the “national honor” of China or undermine “ethnic unity” in China and so on. TikTok executives are required to sign an agreement with ByteDance subsidiary Douyin (the China version of TikTok) that polices speech and demands compliance with China’s socialist system. That’s deeply disturbing but also undetectable. It came out now because of a lawsuit. See this for more https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42739855 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42739855 EDIT: the link above doesn’t work for others for reason, so here is the source story: https://dailycaller.com/2025/01/14/tiktok-forced-staff-oaths-china-socialist-system-court-documents/ https://dailycaller.com/2025/01/14/tiktok-forced-staff-oaths...
LZ_Khan 2y ago
That's a great analogy.
JimmaDaRustla 2y ago
"Too addictive" is such a nonsensical way of saying "accurate". Nicotine being legal but TikTok is not tells you everything you need to know about government wanting to control the "addictiveness" of social media.
tmaly 2y ago
I am surprised someone has not attempted to reverse engineer it or make something very similar.

ternnoburn 2y ago

I wish it were a reckoning for social media, but reading here shows there's plenty of people here who are passionate about "China bad" and see this only through that one lens. And they seem to think it is strictly about TikTok.

epolanski 2y ago
As an European citizen I'm very uneasy with US-based services having my data and I nuked everything from ages bar LinkedIn and HN. The hard part is de-googling.
- krunck 2y ago
  > The hard part is de-googling. But it's worth the effort.
- pc86 2y ago
  The is a completely legitimate and not uncommon viewpoint. But is it relevant in the context of this thread?
  - miroljub 2y ago
    Yes. What is China for Americans, for us Europeans, is the USA. Some argue that it's even worse for Europeans because the Chinese military and government can't reach you while in the USA. And there is no safe place for Europeans from the US government, unless they move to China or Russia.
    - catlikesshrimp 2y ago
      As I understood your post: You said the US is worse because "Europeans" are willing to relocate to the US. And also that China is better because they are not likely to relocate to neither Russia nor China. Is that correct?
      - akovaski 2y ago
        This is an incorrect understanding of what they wrote. It's not about Europeans relocating to the US or Americans relocating to China. They're saying (that other people are saying) that in the US, you are safe from the Chinese government/military. In the EU, you are not safe from the US government/military. Also note that the claim is not that the US is worse than China for Europeans. The claim is that the US is worse for Europeans than China is for Americans. The last part about relocating is saying that you can only be safe from the US government/military in China or Russia. Based on extradition agreements, this conclusion seems true enough on the surface. And maybe US military bases in Europe play a role as well. But this is a thread about national security concerns via social media, and I think it's hard to make a broad and definitive conclusion due to the wide variety of soft and hard powers that countries exert internationally.
    - epolanski 2y ago
      I think that it's a bit overblown. But it's a problem when your biggest ally treats you like an ally, says you're living off him militarily and spies/hacks you non stop. China is not a military threat to Europe, it's literally on the other part of the globe. It's only a threat to US geopolitical ambitions.
    - zeroonetwothree 2y ago
      Oh come on. The US is in a military alliance with most of Europe. And hasn’t banned any European apps from operating. And has similar democratic and human rights policies.
      - herbst 2y ago
        > And has similar democratic and human rights policies. In Europe we have some direct and some less direct democracy and human rights that a really apply without any Guantanamo exceptions. When there are issues there are laws made, not singular platforms banned. It's not similar and offensive to say so.
- jagermo 2y ago
  even harder is finding a payment system that is not US-based and broadly accepted (no, not crypto). I do have some hopes for a digital euro and, maybe, maybe, even Wero. But i fear it will never take off because too many players are involved and there is no clear marketing strategy to get it to people. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wero_(payment) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wero_(payment)
  - herbst 2y ago
    Why not crypto? It's exactly that and works pretty well
    - jagermo 2y ago
      It does not. Its volatile, its backed by some at least as shady companies, rugpulls are constant, the acceptance rate of crypto is way below Mastercard/Visa or even Amex, you need to have at least a charged phone and and and. Sorry, I don't see any available version of crypto replacing MC or Visa.

epolanski 2y ago

I don't understand the argument here, Tik Tok would maximize their monetization in US but not in other markets? I don't buy it.

mywittyname 2y ago
Think of it like consumer protection laws - Ford has higher safety requirements for the vehicles they sell domestically than they do for those sold in Mexico. Thus, it could be argued that they are not maximizing their monetization of the US market by cutting out expensive safety features that consumers don't pay extra for. China is wise to have such laws to protect their citizens.
legitster 2y ago
Corporations in China all operate at the behest of "the people" (aka the party). If the government thinks a product is damaging or harmful to society, it can be taken off the market without any legal mechanisms necessary.
- bdndndndbve 2y ago
  Unlike in America where... they say it's a national security threat and vote to remove it?
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > they say it's a national security threat and vote to remove it? From app stores and American hosting. Only if Bytedance doesn’t sell TikTok to e.g. a French or Indian or American owner. TikTok.com will still resolve (unless Bytedance blocks it). China literally blocks information.
  - BugsJustFindMe 2y ago
    Only the control by a foreign adversary part is being threatened in the US, not the algorithmic opium part twisting the minds of the population. They're two different things. The US so far has no qualms with it if an American is in control of the strings. That's where China differs.

wumeow 2y ago

I remember trying out TikTok and realizing in horror that it was a slot machine for video content.

se4u 2y ago
Have you seen YouTube shorts and Instagram reels. Lol
- wumeow 2y ago
  They copied TikTok.
- dpkirchner 2y ago
  I don't know about Shorts but Instagram has solved the addiction problem by ignoring signals like the user tapping "not interested" or scrolling past videos quickly. They just show junk.

yellow_lead 2y ago

> The algorithm used in the US was apparently banned in China for being too addictive. Source? I could only find this. https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/03/08/1069527/china-tiktok-douyin-teens-privacy/ https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/03/08/1069527/china-ti...

afavour 2y ago
> That same year, Douyin imposed a 40-minute daily limit for users under 14. Last year, Chinese regulators introduced a rule that would limit children under age 18 to two hours of smartphone screen time each day. https://abcnews.go.com/Business/tiktok-china/story?id=108111708 https://abcnews.go.com/Business/tiktok-china/story?id=108111...
- p_j_w 2y ago
  That’s not at all the same as banning the algorithm.
  - andy_xor_andrew 2y ago
    Maybe the "community notes" model isn't so bad after all
  - afavour 2y ago
    It’s not the same, no. I provided the link because it’s what I assume the OP is referring to. Limiting use to 40 minutes is not a ban but it still shows a view that extended exposure to it is harmful. To turn it on its head, if more than 40 minutes is viewed harmful for Chinese youth, why not American?
    - jfdbcv 2y ago
      You know they did that with video games too.. Should we do that here? https://apnews.com/article/gaming-business-children-00db669defcc8e0ca1fc2dc54120a0b8 https://apnews.com/article/gaming-business-children-00db669d...

ritcgab 2y ago

> The algorithm used in the US was apparently banned in China for being too addictive. Source?

cj 2y ago
TikTok itself is banned in mainland china. Do you need much more of a source? Yes, you could say Douyin is available in place of TikTok, but have you asked yourself why they have 2 separate apps? One for mainland China, and another for everyone else? Another source (see the section "How is Douyin different from TikTok?"): https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/25/business/china-tiktok-douyin.html https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/25/business/china-tiktok-dou...
- yyhhsj0521 2y ago
  So is Wikipedia. Otherwise Chinese people just cannot stop reading all those wiki pages about that fungi that only grow on a certain volcano in French New Guinea. How addictive!
- jfdbcv 2y ago
  Isn't this comment quite reductive? There are many reasons why there are two separate apps and not necessarily related to how addictive the algorithm is. The "source" you linked gives one such reason: > Like other social media services in China, Douyin follows the censorship rules of the Chinese Communist Party. It conscientiously removes video pertaining to topics deemed sensitive or inflammatory by the party, although it has proved a little harder than text-based social media to control. Also have you used Douyin? It's really feels like basically the same thing.
miroljub 2y ago
>> The algorithm used in the US was apparently banned in China for being too addictive. > Source? The same source as everything Covid related: Trust me, bro.
- kccoder 2y ago
  > Trust me, bro. Are you referring to the completely scientifically-untrained "bros" who were touting ivermectin and other treatments or cures with little to no scientific evidence of efficacy?

stonesthrowaway 2y ago

> TikTok is perhaps the most impressively addictive social media app ever created. What nonsense. > The algorithm used in the US was apparently banned in China for being too addictive. "Apparently"? Tiktok was forced to separate itself into a chinese version and the non-chinese version by the US because we didn't want "da ccp" controlling tiktok. > There's a certain historic symmetry with how opium was traditionally used in China, then Britain introduced stronger, more disruptive versions, forcing a stronger social reaction. There is no historic symmetry. Unless china invades the US and forces americans to use tiktok. Like britain invaded china ( opium wars ) and forced opium on china's population. What's with all the same propaganda in every tiktok/china related thread? The same talking points on every single thread for the past few years.

hombre_fatal 2y ago
What viewpoint is your use of “da ccp” supposed to disparage?
- whateveracct 2y ago
  I think people (Americans) who view China as a geopolitical rival/enemy of the United States?
herval 2y ago
how did Britain force the Chinese population to consume Opium?
- se4u 2y ago
  I don't know if you are just ignorant about history and unwilling to Google, or if you are making the point that of course British did not force feed opium to the people. What is very well established is that the british fought a war , literally called the opium war by Western historians themselves with the main objective of keeping their opium distribution into China open after the emperor banned it Their action was akin to if some majority owner of Purdue pharma invades US and forces US government to "keep the oxy market open" while letting "people make their own decision".

bigcat12345678 2y ago

> The algorithm used in the US was apparently banned in China for being too addictive. Apparently? What's the obvious about it?

jmyeet 2y ago

That might be true but it's irrelevant. Why? Because that's not the issue the government tackled. Arguing "national security" with (quite literally) secret evidence is laughable. Data protection too is a smokescreen or the government would've passed a comprehensive Federal data protection act, which they'd never do. It's hard to see how the government would tackle algorithmic addiction within running afoul of First Amendment issues. Such an effort should also apply to Meta and Google too if it were attempted. IMHO reciprocal market access was the most defensible position but wasn't the argument the government made. That being said, the government did make a strictly commerce-based argument to avoid free speech issues. As came up in oral arguments (and maybe the opinion?) this is functionally no different to the restrictions on foreign ownership of US media outlets.

Xenoamorphous 2y ago

Does anyone have any link to some docs explaining how it works?

xnx 2y ago
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/05/business/media/tiktok-algorithm.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/05/business/media/tiktok-alg... Like Facebook, the "algorithm" is nothing special. TikTok made some smart design decisions that collect more interaction data that legacy social sites like Instagram and YouTube. They use that data to effectively recommend content.

xnx 2y ago

You could substitute anything you don't like (gambling, alcohol, gacha games, convenience foods, televised sports, reality TV) for "social media" in the above and it makes as much sense.

dizzant 2y ago
> TikTok is perhaps the most impressively addictive gambling app ever created. > Geopolitics aside, I think everyone is kind of aware that gambling is a vice, and like it or not, this could just be the beginning of our society beginning to scrutinize these platforms. Not really. TikTok isn't a gambling app.
- iaseiadit 2y ago
  The comparison here is a slot machine: you pay a a few to play, you pull the lever to play, you win a prize. Here, the payment is your attention, you swipe to the next video to play the game, and the prize if you land on a good video is a small hit of dopamine.
- cratermoon 2y ago
  It's a variable reward dopamine hit generator.
- redwall_hp 2y ago
  Everyone's losing their collective mind about people watching videos on a platform not approved by our oligarchs, while there's an epidemic of people racking up gambling debt from the sudden prevalence of DraftKings and other mobile sports betting apps.
  - root-user 2y ago
    At least in circles I frequent, people are pretty upset with the state of sports betting too. Feels like lots of things are pretty crappy these days, simultaneously
  - zeroonetwothree 2y ago

miroljub 2y ago

> Geopolitics aside, I think everyone is kind of aware that social media is a vice, and like it or not, this could just be the beginning of our society beginning to scrutinize these platforms. Come on. We all know that TikTok was banned because the US regime couldn't control it. If they really wanted to ban vice, they would have banned Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, YouTube, and their kin a long ago.

JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> TikTok was banned because the US regime couldn't control it The law is fine with TikTok being owned by a Nigerian.
- miroljub 2y ago
  Well, Nigeria is or can be controlled by the USA. China is an independent country.
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > Nigeria is or can be controlled by the USA. China is an independent country Take a step back and consider how ridiculous this is. Every country in the world other than these six [1] is controlled by the U.S.? [1] https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-15/subtitle-B/chapter-VII/subchapter-E/part-791/subpart-A/section-791.4 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-15/subtitle-B/chapter-VII...
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - hnfong 2y ago
      That sounds about right.
- sudosysgen 2y ago
  If it was owned by a Nigerian tomorrow and kept the same CEO, board, employees and algorithm, do you honestly think it wouldn't immediately be banned again?

ramoz 2y ago

Maybe it was just a genuine outlet for interconnected entertainment compared to other platforms. American's have always sought similar entertainment since the dawn of the 'couch potato.' Now we can go back to consuming curated narratives/influence on our good ole traditional grams and tubes.

keybored 2y ago

I think that’s besides the point given the entity that is banning it. It’s because it’s Chinese. An equally addictive Western-made app would not have been banned. And generally speaking as a culture we are too liberal to ban things for being too addictive. Again, showing that it is not relevant in this case since it will not inspire bans of other addictive (pseudo) substances on those grounds.

croes 2y ago

It’s not about the algorithm but about the owner of the platform. The same algorithm in US possession isn’t a problem.

srameshc 2y ago
Well said. Only if we start looking at both of these issues separately, owner and algorith and deal with each one appropriately.
ehsankia 2y ago
Indeed, it's all protectionism. They want the money to go to American companies instead. Why do you think the EU, which is generally far more aggressive about these things, has not yet banned TikTok? It's also the same reason Huawei are thriving elsewhere but banned in the US. It's all just trying to protect their big companies with deep pockets.
- ruthmarx 2y ago
  EU is always slow. They felt browser choice was an issue 0 years after it stopped being one, and then freaked out about cookies also 10 more more years later when it wasn't really an issue. Data tracking is an issue, sure. Not cookies though, not anymore.
wahnfrieden 2y ago
It wouldn't be the same algorithm, it would suppress pro-Palestine content more aggressively as Meta does. The US's problem is with the algorithm

lolinder 2y ago

What needs to happen is that all of these platforms need to be straight up banned. TikTok is getting picked on because of its ties to China, but why is it better for Zuckerberg or Musk to have the capabilities that are so frightening in the hands of the CCP? The US social media billionaire class is ostensibly accountable to the law, but they're also perfectly capable of using their influence over these platforms to write the law. One plausible theory for why the politicians talk about fears of spying instead of the real fears of algorithmic manipulation is because they don't want to draw too much attention to how capable these media platforms are of manipulating voters, because they rely on those capabilities to get into and stay in power.

tevon 2y ago
Because if Zuck or Musk does something bad with said power, we can do something about it. We can't really jail the CCP. Additionally, Zuck and Musk don't have armies to back up their propaganda. We shouldn't let foreign powers own the means of broadcast...
- walls 2y ago
  So what you're saying is, freedom of speech doesn't really work?
  - kccoder 2y ago
    Perhaps algorithmically weaponized "speech" by bad actors with bad intentions, especially controlled by adversaries, doesn't work, and was wholly unpredicted or accounted for by the founders.
- jayknight 2y ago
  >Zuck and Musk don't have armies to back up their propaganda But they're about to have all three branches of government to back it up.
- lolinder 2y ago
  Who is we, though? I can't do anything about it. Can you? The people who can do something about it are the people who are already in power in the US. They understandably don't want to share with the CCP, but most of them came to power by manipulating enough voters into voting for them. They stay in power by ensuring that enough voters continue to want to vote for them. Which means that someone like Zuckerberg or Musk has an insanely inordinate amount of influence over whether these people who are in power stay in power. Yes, I think it's marginally better that that influence remain out of the hands of the CCP, but I would rather that that influence not exist at all. It's too dangerous and too prone to corruption.

ksynwa 2y ago

> this could just be the beginning of our society beginning to scrutinize these platforms. Could not be more wrong. "Society" is not deciding anything here. The ban is entirely because of idelogical and geopolical reasons. They have already allowed the good big tech companies to get people hooked as much as they want. If you think you are going to see regulation for public good you will probably be disappointed.

slt2021 2y ago
agree, it was just a shakedown and money grab. some US oligarchs wanted to buy tiktok at deep discount while it was private, and make money off of making it public company
- bko 2y ago
  Why would it be sold at a deep discount? About 45% of the US population uses TikTok and 63% of teens aged 13 to 17 report using TikTok, with 57% of them using the app daily Hell of a product, there would be a crazy bidding war for that kind of engagement
  - burnte 2y ago
    In a fire sale the seller has no leverage.
    - drexlspivey 2y ago
      The seller doesn't need any leverage if there are many interested buyers
      - sulam 2y ago
        If you have to get a sale done, it will absolutely create a discount on the price. This is regardless of the interest — all parties know you have a time limit. Yes you may still do a sale quickly and the price may still be at a premium to your last funding round or whatever you want to use as a mark to market, but it will be at a discount to what you could have gotten.

next_xibalba 2y ago

From a geopolitical perspective, this issue about 3 items: 1) Influence- TikTok gives the CCP significant direct influence over the views of Americans. 2) Data- TikTok collects massive amounts of data on 100s of millions of Americans. Opens many avenues for spying, extortion of influence, etc. 3) Reciprocity- Foreign tech companies are essentially banned from operating in China. Much like with other industries, China is not playing fair, they’re playing to win. Insofar as TikTok has offered a “superior” product, this might be a story of social media and its double edge. But this far more a story of geopolitics.

dmix 2y ago
> TikTok collects massive amounts of data on 100s of millions of Americans. Opens many avenues for spying, extortion of influence, etc. you can buy all of that from data brokers
- hwillis 2y ago
  It's not even about them: > If, for example, a user allows TikTok access to the user’s phone contact list to connect with others on the platform, TikTok can access “any data stored in the user’s contact list,” including names, contact information, contact photos, job titles, and notes. 2 id., at 659. Access to such detailed information about U. S. users, the Government worries, may enable “China to track the locations of Federal employees and contractors, build dossiers of personal information for blackmail, and conduct corporate espionage.” https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24-656_ca7d.pdf https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24-656_ca7d.pdf It seems farcically ridiculous to me to ban the app because it somehow could let china blackmail CEOs.
  - fidotron 2y ago
    They have had legit unintentional problems with apps like Strava: https://www.wired.com/story/strava-heat-map-military-bases-fitness-trackers-privacy/ https://www.wired.com/story/strava-heat-map-military-bases-f... What ZTE were up to was way more nefarious, but couldn't be done with just apps.

bastardoperator 2y ago

The government doesn't care about addictive anything, this is about control and access. If they cared about life or citizens in general they would fix healthcare and maybe introduce any kind of gun control. This is the same government that was slanging cocaine in the 1980's...

wry_discontent 2y ago
Multiple reps publicly said TikTok needed to be banned because they couldn't control the narrative around Gaza as easily. TikTok is the only platform I regularly see content about Gaza fed from the algorithm.
- unethical_ban 2y ago
  I'd be interested in a source for that.
  - westernmostcoy 2y ago
    https://www.axios.com/local/salt-lake-city/2024/05/06/senator-romney-antony-blinken-tiktok-ban-israel-palestinian-content https://www.axios.com/local/salt-lake-city/2024/05/06/senato...
  - seventhtiger 2y ago
    https://www.thefp.com/p/tik-tok-young-americans-hamas-mike-gallag https://www.thefp.com/p/tik-tok-young-americans-hamas-mike-g... https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/11/13/tiktok-facebook-instagram-gaza-hastags/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/11/13/tiktok-... https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/mar/16/tiktok-ban-progressive-politics-activism https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/mar/16/tiktok... https://theintercept.com/2025/01/09/tiktok-ban-israel-palestine-republicans/ https://theintercept.com/2025/01/09/tiktok-ban-israel-palest... https://www.aljazeera.com/program/the-listening-post/2024/3/23/dissecting-the-tiktok-problem https://www.aljazeera.com/program/the-listening-post/2024/3/... https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/28/business/tiktok-israel-hamas-war-gaza.html https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/28/business/tiktok-israel-ha...

bigbacaloa 2y ago

[dead]

TheBigSalad 2y ago

I disagree that social media is a vice. There's nothing inherently wrong with better communication. Although it's hard for me to see the value (or appeal) in TikTok.

ulbu 2y ago
nothing inherently wrong with fentanyl either. not a strong argument.
lolinder 2y ago
What aspect of modern social media contributes to better communication? We're not taking about WhatsApp here, we're talking about algorithmic infinite scroll feeds.
- TheBigSalad 2y ago
  Just on Facebook I can see what all of my old high school friends are up to. I can instantly send anyone a message. I can find things buy that people are selling. I have a community of people who are into the same obscure hobby. That's just off the top of my head.

PittleyDunkin 2y ago

> this could just be the beginning of our society beginning to scrutinize these platforms. I think politicians have scrutinized american social media and they're 100% fine with the misery they induce so long as they are personally enriched by them. > There's a certain historic symmetry with how opium was traditionally used in China TikTok isn't anywhere near as destructive as opium was. Hell, purely in terms of "mis/disinformation" surely facebook and twitter are many times worse than TikTok. Surely the appropriate modern parallel is fentanyl.

whiplash451 2y ago

I'm with you except for the last sentence. What's happening to TikTok is not a good proxy for the trajectory of social media companies in the US, esp Meta. They've got plenty of tailwind.

londons_explore 2y ago

> beginning to scrutinize these platforms. I think the government could fix it with a screen time limit. 30 mins for under 18's, and 1 hour for everyone else, per day. Maybe allow you to carry over some. After that, it's emergency calls only.

Aurornis 2y ago
It's still weird to me to see tech website comments calling for extreme government restrictions on technology use. Limiting adults to 1 hour of screen time per day across social apps? That's a call for an insane level of government intrusion into our lives that is virtually unheard of outside of extremely controlling governments.
- londons_explore 2y ago
  less controlling than banning the software alltogether. The government bans plenty of activities. Taking illegal drugs. Murdering people. Fishing without a license. Investing in unregulated stocks, Etc. Why not addictive apps?

femiagbabiaka 2y ago

Americans have faced so little strife domestically that they're unironically comparing social media addiction to the Opium Wars

mhalle 2y ago

Note that the Supreme Court decided the argument based on national security grounds, not content manipulation grounds. Justice Gorsuch in his concurrence specifically commended the court for doing so, believing that a content manipulation argument could run afoul of first amendment rights. He said that "One man's covert content manipulation is another's editorial discretion".

ranger_danger 2y ago
Be that as it may, I think a large percentage of the opposition don't buy this natsec reasoning at all. You could use that excuse for anything, like mass surveillance via the Patriot Act... EFF's stance is that SCOTUS's decision based on national security ignores the First Amendment scrutiny that is required. > The United States’ foreign foes easily can steal, scrape, or buy Americans’ data by countless other means. The ban or forced sale of one social media app will do virtually nothing to protect Americans' data privacy – only comprehensive consumer privacy legislation can achieve that goal. Shutting down communications platforms or forcing their reorganization based on concerns of foreign propaganda and anti-national manipulation is an eminently anti-democratic tactic, one that the US has previously condemned globally.
- accrual 2y ago
  I don't buy it either. Entire generations are growing up without expectations of digital privacy. Our data leaks everywhere, all the time, intentionally and otherwise. I think it's more about the fact that users of platform are able to connect and share their experiences and potential action for resolving class inequality. There's an entire narrative that is outside of US govt/corp/media control, and that's a problem (to them).

InTheArena 2y ago

China doesn't need Tiktok for opium. They have the real thing as well. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-fentanyl-pipeline-and-chinas-role-in-the-us-opioid-crisis/ https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-fentanyl-pipeline-and...

warner25 2y ago
The fentanyl pipeline is what came to my mind as well; another thing exported from China to the US to disastrous effect on the well-being of many Americans. To be fair, trying to consider the other way around, I wonder what Chinese people could point to as disastrous stuff (in terms of the well-being of their population) coming from the US.
- herbst 2y ago
  What about America's role in the fentanyl issue? It's available all over Europe as well, but people still decide against it and so far it stays a very small mostly regional niche issue.

the_clarence 2y ago

Why are people upvoting this.

liontwist 2y ago
Internet loves those public school history fact references.

dylan604 2y ago

> I think everyone is kind of aware that social media is a vice I don't think this is true. Everyone that is reading this forum might even be too strong. The majority of people happily eating the pablum up as the users of TikTok can't even tell the blatantly false content from just the silly dancing videos.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

daryl_martis 2y ago

[flagged]

throwaway48476 2y ago

The symmetry for opium is fentanyl which China senda to the US by the ton.

blackeyeblitzar 2y ago

I think TikTok and social media in general is much more insidious than opium, because it is hard to know if you are using an addictive product, or what product you’re even being sold (like if you are being sold a subtly manipulated information diet). For example, it just came out that TikTok staff (in the US) were forced to take oaths of loyalty to not disrupt the “national honor” of China or undermine “ethnic unity” in China and so on. TikTok executives are required to sign an agreement with ByteDance subsidiary Douyin (the China version of TikTok) that polices speech and demands compliance with China’s socialist system. That’s deeply disturbing but also undetectable. It came out now because of a lawsuit. See this for more https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42739855 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42739855 EDIT: the link above doesn’t work for others for reason, so here is the source story: https://dailycaller.com/2025/01/14/tiktok-forced-staff-oaths-china-socialist-system-court-documents/ https://dailycaller.com/2025/01/14/tiktok-forced-staff-oaths...

LZ_Khan 2y ago

That's a great analogy.

JimmaDaRustla 2y ago

"Too addictive" is such a nonsensical way of saying "accurate". Nicotine being legal but TikTok is not tells you everything you need to know about government wanting to control the "addictiveness" of social media.

tmaly 2y ago

I am surprised someone has not attempted to reverse engineer it or make something very similar.