29 ms·

Yeah, I totally expect a 14 y.o. girl who joins TikTok to check trendy dance move to be aware of dangers of CCP propaganda. What percentage of population under

Yeah, I totally expect a 14 y.o. girl who joins TikTok to check trendy dance move to be aware of dangers of CCP propaganda. What percentage of population understands that propaganda can be subtle? Sneak some ragebait here and there to make it look like situation is worse than it is, exaggerate, radicalize people...

grajaganDev 2y ago
I had a CS grad student very confidently tell me that TikTok was not owned by a Chinese company.
- 6P58r3MXJSLi 2y ago
  a Chinese company, yes, but backed by some of the major investment funds in the west, the Chinese own 20%, Chinese government is under 1%.
  - grajaganDev 2y ago
    This seems a bit like splitting hairs. There is quite a bit of naivete regarding how the Chinese government controls Chinese companies. It is very different from the US.
    - 6P58r3MXJSLi 2y ago
      > There is quite a bit of naivete regarding how the Chinese government controls Chinese companies. I happen to know how China works, have you got some example to present? > It is very different from the US. Actually, not really. Can Facebook keep alive their "fact checking" program, now that Trump is president and not Biden, whose administration ordered it, probably more against Trump himself, than any other adversary of the USA? Are Vanguard and BlackRock free to invest in whatever company they want? For example: why are Vanguard and BlackRock backing Unicredit to buy Commerzbank, one of the few European banks not owned or heavily funded by American funds?
      - Workaccount2 2y ago
        A Chinese company cannot take the CCP to court and win. There is no separation of powers in China. There is no constitutional protection held on place by a group outside the ruling party. China has a faux free capitalist society. Chinese companies are the way they are because the government lets them be that way, not because they have the right to be that way.
        6P58r3MXJSLi 2y ago
        > A Chinese company cannot take the CCP to court and win. There is no separation of powers in China Why should a company take the CCP to court though? They are in business together and have grown immensely in the past 30 years. > There is no constitutional protection held on place by a group outside the ruling party Where is that protection in the US though? Call them parties, a faux bi-headed system instead of an honest one-headed one, and you get the same outcome. > China has a faux free capitalist society They never wanted US capitalism though, so it's business as intended. > Chinese companies are the way they are because the people of China like them like that. Believe me, they do not want to be like you. The opposite is true in fact.
        Workaccount2 2y ago
        >Why should a company take the CCP to court though? Someone's internet is monitored...
        6P58r3MXJSLi 2y ago
        > Someone's internet is monitored... Yeah! and it's 99% the NSA on this side of the World. https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/us-security-agency-spied-merkel-other-top-european-officials-through-danish-2021-05-30/ https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/us-security-agency-spie... Has someone brought the US to court for that? And why not?
        Workaccount2 2y ago
  - motorest 2y ago
    > a Chinese company, yes, but backed by some of the major investment funds in the west, the Chinese own 20%, Chinese government is under 1%. ByteDance not only blocked the sale of TikTok to a US company but also TikTok unilaterally decided to shut down operations in the US to strongarm the US government to prevent it's sale. If the CCP actually had no control over TikTok and at most they only held a residual non-controlling position, then how do you explain the scorched earth strategy that is only aligned with the CCP's strategy and throws all other shareholders under the bus?
  - scarab92 2y ago
    The Chinese government has a majority of the voting stock. More importantly, the company based in China, and the engineers working on it's recommendation system are based in China, and both are subject to the laws of China. From a national security perspective, it's controlled by the Chinese government.
- _heimdall 2y ago
  Well they can believe that if they want, it won't hurt anyone. For better or worse, free speech means anyone can say what they want and free thought in general means people can happily be wrong about a fact that seems very easy to check.
  - killerstorm 2y ago
    This sounds like a libertarian idea of defense: we don't need an army, everyone can just buy a gun. The idea that people can just choose to resist a foreign propaganda machine is just as comical.
ty6853 2y ago
America is handing this opportunity on a platter by practically outlawing child independence. A kid should be out exploring on their own, shooting squirrels, riding their bike to the next town, bailing hay for cash at the farm at the edge of town. I didn't become a staunch supporter of most American classical liberal principles because an app told me to, it's because it's how I lived when I grew up. If you shut me in or chained me to a parent all day, well maybe you grow up with whatever tiktok tells you since you see it as the only way to stretch your legs.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- wholinator2 2y ago
  Well, it sounds like you may have grown up in the country. Personally i think it's a bad idea for children to have guns in densely populated cities, searching for small animals to kill in the one park within "dangerous but still walking" distance. Regardless of what you believe or how you grew up, it's simply impossible to replicate that kind of freedom and safety for a large majority of American children. Our cities are run by cars, children are notoriously bad at sensing them. I'm sure there's things that could be done but nothing, nothing can give a kid in Brooklyn the opportunity to "bail hay at the farm on the edge of town".
  - ty6853 2y ago
    The big city equivalent is closer to a bus pass, $5 for a hot dog, and see you at dusk. The danger of dodging cars arguably is less than being locked in with TikTok. Maybe kids hawk chicharones in the city instead of bailing hay, obviously it won't be a direct translation.
_heimdall 2y ago
That sounds like a reasonable argument to create an age limit for social media. It also sounds like an argument for parents to step in - every child is different and a parent should be doing the parenting rather than Congress and the White House.
- scarab92 2y ago
  Adults are also quite susceptible to propaganda.
  - _heimdall 2y ago
    Sure, I'm not arguing that propaganda is ineffective. I'm arguing that people should at least have access to the facts and be allowed to make their own decisions. In this case the important facts are simply that TikTok is a Chinese app and the CCP almost certainly influences them. When it comes to children that is a different story, but the debate should be whether we enforce an age limit on social media. There is at least precedent (for better or worse) for an age limit on things we think children aren't ready or able to consume.

grajaganDev 2y ago

I had a CS grad student very confidently tell me that TikTok was not owned by a Chinese company.

6P58r3MXJSLi 2y ago
a Chinese company, yes, but backed by some of the major investment funds in the west, the Chinese own 20%, Chinese government is under 1%.
- grajaganDev 2y ago
  This seems a bit like splitting hairs. There is quite a bit of naivete regarding how the Chinese government controls Chinese companies. It is very different from the US.
  - 6P58r3MXJSLi 2y ago
    > There is quite a bit of naivete regarding how the Chinese government controls Chinese companies. I happen to know how China works, have you got some example to present? > It is very different from the US. Actually, not really. Can Facebook keep alive their "fact checking" program, now that Trump is president and not Biden, whose administration ordered it, probably more against Trump himself, than any other adversary of the USA? Are Vanguard and BlackRock free to invest in whatever company they want? For example: why are Vanguard and BlackRock backing Unicredit to buy Commerzbank, one of the few European banks not owned or heavily funded by American funds?
    - Workaccount2 2y ago
      A Chinese company cannot take the CCP to court and win. There is no separation of powers in China. There is no constitutional protection held on place by a group outside the ruling party. China has a faux free capitalist society. Chinese companies are the way they are because the government lets them be that way, not because they have the right to be that way.
      - 6P58r3MXJSLi 2y ago
        > A Chinese company cannot take the CCP to court and win. There is no separation of powers in China Why should a company take the CCP to court though? They are in business together and have grown immensely in the past 30 years. > There is no constitutional protection held on place by a group outside the ruling party Where is that protection in the US though? Call them parties, a faux bi-headed system instead of an honest one-headed one, and you get the same outcome. > China has a faux free capitalist society They never wanted US capitalism though, so it's business as intended. > Chinese companies are the way they are because the people of China like them like that. Believe me, they do not want to be like you. The opposite is true in fact.
        Workaccount2 2y ago
        >Why should a company take the CCP to court though? Someone's internet is monitored...
        6P58r3MXJSLi 2y ago
        > Someone's internet is monitored... Yeah! and it's 99% the NSA on this side of the World. https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/us-security-agency-spied-merkel-other-top-european-officials-through-danish-2021-05-30/ https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/us-security-agency-spie... Has someone brought the US to court for that? And why not?
        Workaccount2 2y ago
- motorest 2y ago
  > a Chinese company, yes, but backed by some of the major investment funds in the west, the Chinese own 20%, Chinese government is under 1%. ByteDance not only blocked the sale of TikTok to a US company but also TikTok unilaterally decided to shut down operations in the US to strongarm the US government to prevent it's sale. If the CCP actually had no control over TikTok and at most they only held a residual non-controlling position, then how do you explain the scorched earth strategy that is only aligned with the CCP's strategy and throws all other shareholders under the bus?
- scarab92 2y ago
  The Chinese government has a majority of the voting stock. More importantly, the company based in China, and the engineers working on it's recommendation system are based in China, and both are subject to the laws of China. From a national security perspective, it's controlled by the Chinese government.
_heimdall 2y ago
Well they can believe that if they want, it won't hurt anyone. For better or worse, free speech means anyone can say what they want and free thought in general means people can happily be wrong about a fact that seems very easy to check.
- killerstorm 2y ago
  This sounds like a libertarian idea of defense: we don't need an army, everyone can just buy a gun. The idea that people can just choose to resist a foreign propaganda machine is just as comical.

ty6853 2y ago

America is handing this opportunity on a platter by practically outlawing child independence. A kid should be out exploring on their own, shooting squirrels, riding their bike to the next town, bailing hay for cash at the farm at the edge of town. I didn't become a staunch supporter of most American classical liberal principles because an app told me to, it's because it's how I lived when I grew up. If you shut me in or chained me to a parent all day, well maybe you grow up with whatever tiktok tells you since you see it as the only way to stretch your legs.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
wholinator2 2y ago
Well, it sounds like you may have grown up in the country. Personally i think it's a bad idea for children to have guns in densely populated cities, searching for small animals to kill in the one park within "dangerous but still walking" distance. Regardless of what you believe or how you grew up, it's simply impossible to replicate that kind of freedom and safety for a large majority of American children. Our cities are run by cars, children are notoriously bad at sensing them. I'm sure there's things that could be done but nothing, nothing can give a kid in Brooklyn the opportunity to "bail hay at the farm on the edge of town".
- ty6853 2y ago
  The big city equivalent is closer to a bus pass, $5 for a hot dog, and see you at dusk. The danger of dodging cars arguably is less than being locked in with TikTok. Maybe kids hawk chicharones in the city instead of bailing hay, obviously it won't be a direct translation.

_heimdall 2y ago

That sounds like a reasonable argument to create an age limit for social media. It also sounds like an argument for parents to step in - every child is different and a parent should be doing the parenting rather than Congress and the White House.

scarab92 2y ago
Adults are also quite susceptible to propaganda.
- _heimdall 2y ago
  Sure, I'm not arguing that propaganda is ineffective. I'm arguing that people should at least have access to the facts and be allowed to make their own decisions. In this case the important facts are simply that TikTok is a Chinese app and the CCP almost certainly influences them. When it comes to children that is a different story, but the debate should be whether we enforce an age limit on social media. There is at least precedent (for better or worse) for an age limit on things we think children aren't ready or able to consume.