18 ms·

What's that saying? The best way to get a promotion is to cause a problem and then fix it? Political things aside, it's crazy to see so much of a flip-flop so

What's that saying? The best way to get a promotion is to cause a problem and then fix it? Political things aside, it's crazy to see so much of a flip-flop so quickly. Has there been any other behavior like this in the past where a company "shut themselves down" to make a big political statement and then almost immediately undid the shut down?

palata 2y ago
> What's that saying? The best way to get a promotion is to cause a problem and then fix it? In Trump's world, I think you should cause a problem, blame somebody else, and then fix it.
yieldcrv 2y ago
Is it a big political statement to shut down a couple hours before the deadline of shutting down? The app stores removed the app in accordance with that timeline too.
- TypingOutBugs 2y ago
  There was no deadline, the app stores didn’t need to remove it. The Biden administration said it would be left to the Trump administration to review, they had no reason to shut it down. It’s purely to force Trumps hand a bit.
  - yieldcrv 2y ago
    Thanks. So that was between friday night and today, that means it would also be true that Bytedance could not rely on the autonomous aspects of the US government to not create liability, unless given an explicit assurance. I wouldn't say following the law would be purely to force a hand, I would say multiple things can be true at once. They still had liability. Other government agencies, like the SEC, has been filing court cases all the way till the last minute even though they’ll likely get dropped tomorrow. It is understandable to take a risk averse approach for a company.
  - arandomusername 2y ago
    > As of January 19, the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act will make it unlaw- ful for companies in the United States to provide services to distribute, maintain, or update the social media platform TikTok https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/30/TikTok_v._Garland.pdf https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/30/TikTok_v... Please do some research next time before spreading lies.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - TeaBrain 2y ago
      That is simply a topical remark within the judgement denying the injunction. It isn't relevant to what is enforceable or being enforced. The Act in question doesn't contain wording that implies that TikTok would have been required to be taken immediately offline, as the act requires enforcement by the FTC, which hasn't yet moved on the matter. https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/7520/text/eh https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/7520...
      - arandomusername 2y ago
        It clearly states it will be unlawful for companies (e.g oracle for cloud, google for app distro) to provide services to Tiktok
    - TypingOutBugs 2y ago
      From the White House Press Secretary: “It is a stunt, and we see no reason for TikTok or other companies to take actions in the next few days before the Trump Administration takes office on Monday. We have laid out our position clearly and straightforwardly: actions to implement this law will fall to the next administration. So TikTok and other companies should take up any concerns with them.” Please do some research next time before accusing people of spreading lies.
  - gpm 2y ago
    The Biden administration said it wasn't going to initiate enforcement proceedings in the last 24 hours of their administration. It did not, nor did it have the authority to, waive the apps stores requirement under the law to do that. To remove the potential for future enforcement actions (up to 5 years in the future) punishing them for failing to comply with the law. Neither will Trump even once he is president unless and until amongst other things ByteDance signs legally binding documents that they will divest from TikTok within 90 days.
- Brystephor 2y ago
  No. It's a big political statement to include political messaging and plead to political figures when you shut down. Then to praise those political figures afterwards is additional political messaging.
- Grimblewald 2y ago
  No, many users are sharing the theory that the downtime was to allow meta or google to take over the backend. Content delivery is different on the app now. For example, ads being served during videos not between videos.
whimsicalism 2y ago
[flagged]
- creato 2y ago
  It literally was? Everything that happened in the last 24 hours specifically has nothing to do with any legal requirement or deadline. It was a show.
  - A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 2y ago
    FWIW, it was at least year in the making, but I will admit that the execution did add a proper show vibe.. as would be expected from a reality show star.
Gormo 2y ago
> What's that saying? The best way to get a promotion is to cause a problem and then fix it? There's too much effort and uncertainty involved in actually creating a problem and then actually fixing it. It's much easier and more reliable to create the perception of a problem by promulgating lots of FUD, then engage in performative theatrics to nullify the FUD and proclaim the problem fixed.
- Brystephor 2y ago
  What's the difference between the perception of a problem being present and the existence of a problem? If you create an issue, and solve an issue, indifferent of the issue being real, you'll be credited with solving the issue. It's ridiculous at this scale
  - Gormo 2y ago
    > What's the difference between the perception of a problem being present and the existence of a problem? Well, it would be the same as the distinction between real and imaginary in any other context.
    - dcow 2y ago
      Perception is reality
      - dymk 2y ago
        You can be passed out in the back seat but a car crash is still going to kill you
        dcow 2y ago
        That’s not what the saying means, obviously -_-
        Gormo 2y ago
hackyhacky 2y ago
> it's crazy to see so much of a flip-flop so quickly. Trump was against Tiktok before he was for it. He was also against crypto currencies before he released his own.
- JFingleton 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - hackyhacky 2y ago
    > People aren't allowed to change their minds? Sure they are, but they should explain why they changed their minds. In the case of meme coins like $TRUMP, it's hard to defend crypto as an investment or as a currency, which leaves the obvious reason: it's a scam. In the case of Trump, I'm sure he was all for crypto as soon as he realized that he personally could make money from it. Same goes for his NFT grift.
    - bdangubic 2y ago
      not sure why people still try to understand Trump after all these years him being a public figure. he does absolutely NOTHING and EVER which does not help his bottom line and benefit him personally. he’ll fucking steal money from a children’s charity which is about as low as humans go - the lowest scum of the earth to make a penny. hence him “changing his mind” (he was a democrat and was sucking clinton’s dicks for decades) has nothing to do with me and you changing our minds based on something we learned - for him there is a single thought - how can I profit from it.
      - secstate 2y ago
        Don't attempt to anthropomorphize Donald Trump. He's more like a lawn mower with daddy issues.
        bdangubic 2y ago
        he’ll leave office as world’s first trillionaire so pretty expensive lawn mower
elfbargpt 2y ago
I think it's obvious that US lawmakers were somehow convinced ByteDance would absolutely divest from TikTok if threatened with an ultimatum. They were never prepared for an actual ban and the resulting fallout. Now that it's obvious they won't divest (which should have been obvious the entire time), they flipped
- freeopinion 2y ago
  Can you point to a lawmaker who has flipped?
  - elfbargpt 2y ago
    Here's what Chuck Schumer said: "It's clear that more time is needed to find an American buyer and not disrupt the lives and livelihoods of millions of Americans of so many influencers who have built up a good network of followers" [1] The deal was divest or ban, not look for "more time to find a buyer". My point is they were never prepared for an actual ban. [1] https://x.com/kenklippenstein/status/1880007290830688609 https://x.com/kenklippenstein/status/1880007290830688609
    - __MatrixMan__ 2y ago
      Here we have a group of people that have given up on their duties re: checks and balances because following orders is easier. What a surprise that they're spineless in other ways too.
    - blitzar 2y ago
      Won't somebody think of the influencers.
      - anon7000 2y ago
        I think the bigger point is there are a lot of young people making really decent money on TikTok. (I know a few of them.) The result is a lot of push back from a lot of people who are effectively loosing their jobs. This is probably more clear to politicians now than it was a year ago, since the actual “threat” of the situation set in for more people.
appleorchard46 2y ago
> Has there been any other behavior like this in the past where a company "shut themselves down" to make a big political statement and then almost immediately undid the shut down? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_shutdowns_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_shutdowns_in_the_Un...
- eru 2y ago
  Well, different standards apply for government than for private companies.
- scarab92 2y ago
  Fiduciary responsibilities make it unlikely that many companies would risk it. There’s always a chance you don’t come back, and there’s likely to be a loss of marketshare for simply being unavailable for a period and forcing users to trial alternatives. But, TikTok is not purely commercially focused. A majority of the voting stock of ByteDance is held by the Chinese government, who clearly see non-financial strategic value in controlling it. Otherwise, they likely could have negotiated a spin out the US operation, whereby they retain most of the equity upside but give majority voting control to a US buyer.
  - kelseydh 2y ago
    Can you imagine any other country making this demand and it being taken seriously? It is negotiation by means of extortion. Why are American tech companies entitled to the profits of an internationally used app?
    - bluesnews 2y ago
      They aren't demanding a sale. They are just saying they can't operate in the country if they don't sell. They have a choice to leave the country or follow the rules.
      - Timber-6539 2y ago
blahedo 2y ago
> flip-flop so quickly The timing and phrasing make it clear that this was planned and negotiated in advance, and the shutdown was just for show in order to be able to post a memo about how "President Trump" saved it. If actual negotiation had to occur, it would not have happened in the twelve hours between midnight and noon on Sunday morning. The point of the stunt was to persuade large numbers of younger folks that the Ds are the bad guys and Trump in particular is the hero. And it'll work as designed.
- iknowSFR 2y ago
  What’s the evidence of this? It seems highly plausible but do we have any proof besides speculation?
  - willis936 2y ago
    My partner uses TikTok and was greeted with a message today saying that DJT saved the app. That isn't possible because he isn't president yet. It's all very embarrassing.
    - lubujackson 2y ago
      Also the CEO of TikTok is going to sit directly behind Trump at the inauguration. It's not even subtle and half the point is that it isn't subtle - bend the knee to Trump and you'll be taken care of, is the message. We operate just like Russia at this point. Also, expect to see that Facebook is partnering with TikTok on Monday morning. The head of the bill banning TikTok just invested 100 million in Meta... so I imagine there will be a followup announcement how Trump brokered some deal to Americanize TikTok or something.
      - ceejayoz 2y ago
        I got an internal ad on Facebook telling me to connect my TikTok account the other day. https://imgur.com/a/yCOpifC https://imgur.com/a/yCOpifC
sandworm101 2y ago
He who can destroy a thing controls that thing. Expect the new administration to have great influence on tiktok policy and content.
- Grimblewald 2y ago
  Already do and users are noticing. Ads have been introduce in a really obnixious facebook/instagram style and contebt moderation is more facebook/instagrem esq as well. It would surprise no one on the platform if meta has already aquired it, and it just needs to be announced.
nico 2y ago
> a company "shut themselves down" to make a big political statement They were following the law. Anything else is just promises by people who are not exactly known for following through with them Shutting down because the law says it, and to prevent really big penalties, is not making “a big political statement
- acomms 2y ago
  Nothing in the law changed since yesterday. This is only theatre.
- aaronharnly 2y ago
  The law did not require them to suspend the service.
  - space_fountain 2y ago
    The law requires Oracle who hosts their data companies that provide cdn services to stop working with them. The law did require them to suspend service, but not quite as soon as they did and nothing had changed legally
  - margalabargala 2y ago
    The law required them to choose from among several options, one of which was suspending the service. The law did not permit maintaining the status quo as an option.
    - kelnos 2y ago
      No, it does not at all require ByteDance to suspend service. It requires Apple and Google to stop distributing the app on their app stores, and it requires any US-based hosting providers that host TikTok services to stop providing those services. ByteDance could shut down any US-hosted services and serve from outside the US, and be entirely compliant with the law. The TikTok mobile app might become out of date and stop working (for people who already had it installed on their phones), but www.tiktok.com would continue to work just fine.
Aloisius 2y ago
Trump going soft on China was predictable.
- MangoCoffee 2y ago
  Trump's biggest backers, Elon Musk, Jeff Yass...etc. all have ties with China.
  - swat535 2y ago
    People need to understand that politicians (dare I say everywhere?..) are just business man with dressing. They simply put up a show for people to win the votes and once they get elected, do whatever they can to make an extra buck. Trump, a convicted felon is certainly no different..
    - valval 2y ago
      [flagged]
- blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
  Was it? Apart from Elon’s dependence on China market for Tesla sales, I didn’t think so. Trump has been talking a lot about going hard against adversaries. The TikTok ban is something he supported. And it’s more popular on the right than left.
1a527dd5 2y ago
> Has there been any other behavior like this in the past where a company "shut themselves down" to make a big political statement and then almost immediately undid the shut down? OnlyFans did something similar: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OnlyFans#Restrictions_on_pornographic_creators https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OnlyFans#Restrictions_on_porno...
- SilasX 2y ago
  That wasn’t a political statement. Per your link, it was a belief that that could not continue the credit card payments while staying in compliance with the law.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
_heimdall 2y ago
Union strikes may fit that bill.
derektank 2y ago
The SOPA and PIPA protests were basically that
gnkyfrg 2y ago
[dead]
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
hot_gril 2y ago
Epic Games sorta did this to Fortnite, but the reversal wasn't quick
JKCalhoun 2y ago
It's like real life is playing like a shitty TV series. Constant cliff hangers, plot twists that never resolve....
- bamboozled 2y ago
  Agree, and the velocity is amazing, it's really hard to keep up with the shenanigans. In my opinion, it will have a negative impact on the economy, education, birth rates etc. Government should stay out of the way, and I don't want to hear about it every ten seconds, on the other hand, I don't want to have to read the news every five minutes to audit what they're doing.
paulddraper 2y ago
> Has there been any other behavior like this in the past where a company "shut themselves down" to make a big political statement and then almost immediately undid the shut down? A number of internet services (e.g. Wikipedia) shut down temporarily on Jan 18, 2012 as a political statement against SOPA.
chucknthem 2y ago
Uber has used this tactic many times in their early days. It mostly worked because citizens got used to cheap rides and got mad at their government for taking it away.
stuckkeys 2y ago
moonshine stopped working also. I guess it was under the same parent org. They all back to working now.
throwawayq3423 2y ago
> Political things aside, it's crazy to see so much of a flip-flop so quickly Trump has never had any issue he has not been on both sides of. He has no ideology, he does what benefits him in the moment at any given moment.
- fundad 2y ago
  According to the people I work with, all they care about is kids in cages. They value “tough talk” on immigration above anything else. Being influenced by Russia or China don’t even register.
  - throwawayq3423 2y ago
    > all they care about is kids in cages To clear, they want kids in cages. Did I read that right?
kelnos 2y ago
> it's crazy to see so much of a flip-flop so quickly I wish people would understand that Trump has no ideology. Over a span of decades, Trump has been critical of liberals and conservatives, often at the same time. He's praised conservatives and liberals, often at the same time. His political positions are aligned with whatever benefits him the most. He doesn't care about making life better for the middle class. He doesn't care if immigration restrictions are relaxed or tightened. He doesn't care about whether or not transgender people have access to health care or can or can't serve in the military. He only cares what positions on those issues will benefit him and his friends at any given time. And if tomorrow holding the opposite position will benefit him more, he'll switch, just like that, and somehow convince his base that's what they believe too. Trump is the one who was championing the idea of a TikTok divestiture or ban, back when he was president the first time. He's only changed his mind on that because opposing the ban is better for him now.
nostromo 2y ago
The goal was always to get TikTok divested of Chinese ownership, not to ban it. The ban was the stick and selling it for a lot of money was the carrot. ByteDance surprised almost everyone in choosing the stick.
- tw1984 2y ago
  > ByteDance surprised almost everyone in choosing the stick. shortly after Trump tried to force bytedance to sell its shares during his first term, the Chinese government passed laws to include the recommendation systems used in social media into the export control list. bytedance thus won't be able to sell tiktok without approval from the chinese government.
  - pjc50 2y ago
    Does anyone have a citation for this? Probably higher quality if it's in Chinese even if I have to machine translate it. Because that would be a clear pointer of suspicion.
    - tw1984 2y ago
      2020 report by nyt, paywalled of coursed https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/29/technology/china-tiktok-export-controls.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/29/technology/china-tiktok-e... the official export control list in Chinese https://www.most.gov.cn/tztg/202312/W020231221620858841394.pdf https://www.most.gov.cn/tztg/202312/W020231221620858841394.p... it is on the 29th page, with export control number 086501X, item 18.
      - pjc50 2y ago
        OK, that's pretty convincing. And it's interesting how much other stuff is in there like OCR for Hanzi!
- myko 2y ago
  > The goal was always to get TikTok divested of Chinese ownership, not to ban it. Seems like the goal pivoted recently - the goal is to keep TikTok Chinese and have them supporting the corrupt regime taking over the US, similar to other foreign adversaries have in the past
B-Con 2y ago
It had to have been a PR move. The Tik Tok in-app notes for "shutting down" and "we're back" both referenced Trump by name. I doubt they would do that without his explicit consent. Trump beamed his name and heroics directly into the eyeballs of 50m people before he even took office. That wouldn't have happened without the brief blip going dark. Odds are good he said he'd pardon them (which is a whole different story) but ensured they'd go dark for a few hours, either by withholding his guarantee or by directly coordinating it with them. This is Trump. It's always about him. If we haven't learned that we haven't learned anything.
- tw1984 2y ago
  like your conspiracy theory, lots of entertainments in it.
- nprateem 2y ago
  Ha ha are you serious? Trump is a fragile-egoed narcissist. He's not even in power and already everyone's sucking up to him.
flipbrad 2y ago
I dont think we know the actual range of motives for shutdown. Oracle may have forced it, for instance.
JoshTko 2y ago
Not exactly the same but ChatGPT's firing and rehiring of Sam Altman seems to be in the same vein
HWR_14 2y ago
In 2012 a coordinated action by 100,000 sites (including major platforms like Reddit, Wikipedia and Google) all went dark for 24 hours to protest SOPA, which was successful in killing the bill. Some only changed the color scheme and added a message but others shut down.
- tekknik 2y ago
  > which was successful in killing the bill the protests had no bearing on the outcome of the bill. most of us didn’t even know they were taking place.
  - evolve2k 2y ago
    Sorry what?! I was in Australia and even from here it was obvious it was happening. Maybe go back refresh your mind on old HN posts. Sorry not meaning to be rude but the digital protests of the day were very significant. Lots of media coverage and site blackouts and banners and average punters waking up to the interruption. Stacks was going on. You can even watch Internets Own Boy doco where it’s covered.
    - tekknik 2y ago
      having lived through that period and relying on the internet to do my day job i didn’t notice. also if you look at the history of the bill, there is no mention of public opinion at all. They shelved the bill due to lack of agreement.
      - lolinder 2y ago
        Well, speak for yourself, not "most of us". On 01/18/2012 the HN front page was basically nothing but SOPA/PIPA content: https://news.ycombinator.com/front?day=2012-01-18 https://news.ycombinator.com/front?day=2012-01-18 As for your claim they had no effect, that's not what the sources from the time say—on the day of the protests 13 senators announced their opposition, including 5 former co-sponsors: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/01/pipa-support-collapses-with-13-new-opponents-in-senate/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/01/pipa-support-col... When you lose five co-sponsors in one day and that day happens to coincide with the internet shutting down, I don't find it very credible to try to claim that there was internal dissent all along.
FrustratedMonky 2y ago
What am I missing. Trump as a private citizen, can't issue a statement and automatically over-turn a law. If someone wants to enforce the law, they still can. It's still on the books, and Supreme Court upheld it.
hedora 2y ago
Heh; I thought you were talking about trump the first few times I read this. He appointed a bunch of corrupt Supreme Court judges, and they upheld an obviously unconstitutional law (bill of attainment). Now, on his first day in office, he gets to be a hero by unilaterally deciding not to enforce the law. So, moving forward, (1) we should expect increasingly unjust and draconian laws, and (2) as long as you do what Trump asks, you can break whatever federal laws you want. (Zukerberg, Bezos and Trump have already gotten in line for this.)
throw0101c 2y ago
> Political things aside, it's crazy to see so much of a flip-flop so quickly. "Rep. Mike Waltz calls out the Biden campaign's TikTok account: 'They should be ashamed'": * https://www.foxnews.com/video/6346831867112 https://www.foxnews.com/video/6346831867112 Waltz chosen as Trump's national security advisor: * https://www.npr.org/2024/11/11/nx-s1-5187098/trump-national-security-adviser-mike-waltz https://www.npr.org/2024/11/11/nx-s1-5187098/trump-national-... And currently "Trump security adviser doesn't rule out continued Chinese ownership of TikTok": * https://www.reuters.com/technology/trump-security-adviser-doesnt-rule-out-continued-chinese-ownership-tiktok-2025-01-19/ https://www.reuters.com/technology/trump-security-adviser-do... So ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
spandrew 2y ago
100% it's what happened. And the craziest part is that it worked because Biden went along with it. It's easy enough to argue Trump played hardball to negotiate for any divestiture that may occur; because that was his goal all along. The narrative/pundits can spin this easily in his favour. Either because they gave in to the ploy, or because they were unable to close a TikTok deal, the Democrats look incompetent here. And Trump gains favour in the younger demo (that he's already pretty strong in) AND with SMB because he gave TikTok more time.
- dowager_dan99 2y ago
  oh - and his true audience all along: an American oligarch is about to get at least half of TikTok for a steal. Anyone doing graft, corruption or just questionable wealth accumulation in the millions or single billions is going to look like small ball for at least the next four years.
  - spandrew 2y ago
    Yeah it's just decent strategy on their part (I hate to say). Even if they don't profit directly off of the TikTok deal they look like absolute bosses for being able to "give" Americans what they wanted all along.

palata 2y ago

> What's that saying? The best way to get a promotion is to cause a problem and then fix it? In Trump's world, I think you should cause a problem, blame somebody else, and then fix it.

yieldcrv 2y ago

Is it a big political statement to shut down a couple hours before the deadline of shutting down? The app stores removed the app in accordance with that timeline too.

TypingOutBugs 2y ago
There was no deadline, the app stores didn’t need to remove it. The Biden administration said it would be left to the Trump administration to review, they had no reason to shut it down. It’s purely to force Trumps hand a bit.
- yieldcrv 2y ago
  Thanks. So that was between friday night and today, that means it would also be true that Bytedance could not rely on the autonomous aspects of the US government to not create liability, unless given an explicit assurance. I wouldn't say following the law would be purely to force a hand, I would say multiple things can be true at once. They still had liability. Other government agencies, like the SEC, has been filing court cases all the way till the last minute even though they’ll likely get dropped tomorrow. It is understandable to take a risk averse approach for a company.
- arandomusername 2y ago
  > As of January 19, the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act will make it unlaw- ful for companies in the United States to provide services to distribute, maintain, or update the social media platform TikTok https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/30/TikTok_v._Garland.pdf https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/30/TikTok_v... Please do some research next time before spreading lies.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - TeaBrain 2y ago
    That is simply a topical remark within the judgement denying the injunction. It isn't relevant to what is enforceable or being enforced. The Act in question doesn't contain wording that implies that TikTok would have been required to be taken immediately offline, as the act requires enforcement by the FTC, which hasn't yet moved on the matter. https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/7520/text/eh https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/7520...
    - arandomusername 2y ago
      It clearly states it will be unlawful for companies (e.g oracle for cloud, google for app distro) to provide services to Tiktok
  - TypingOutBugs 2y ago
    From the White House Press Secretary: “It is a stunt, and we see no reason for TikTok or other companies to take actions in the next few days before the Trump Administration takes office on Monday. We have laid out our position clearly and straightforwardly: actions to implement this law will fall to the next administration. So TikTok and other companies should take up any concerns with them.” Please do some research next time before accusing people of spreading lies.
- gpm 2y ago
  The Biden administration said it wasn't going to initiate enforcement proceedings in the last 24 hours of their administration. It did not, nor did it have the authority to, waive the apps stores requirement under the law to do that. To remove the potential for future enforcement actions (up to 5 years in the future) punishing them for failing to comply with the law. Neither will Trump even once he is president unless and until amongst other things ByteDance signs legally binding documents that they will divest from TikTok within 90 days.
Brystephor 2y ago
No. It's a big political statement to include political messaging and plead to political figures when you shut down. Then to praise those political figures afterwards is additional political messaging.
Grimblewald 2y ago
No, many users are sharing the theory that the downtime was to allow meta or google to take over the backend. Content delivery is different on the app now. For example, ads being served during videos not between videos.

whimsicalism 2y ago

[flagged]

creato 2y ago
It literally was? Everything that happened in the last 24 hours specifically has nothing to do with any legal requirement or deadline. It was a show.
- A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 2y ago
  FWIW, it was at least year in the making, but I will admit that the execution did add a proper show vibe.. as would be expected from a reality show star.

Gormo 2y ago

> What's that saying? The best way to get a promotion is to cause a problem and then fix it? There's too much effort and uncertainty involved in actually creating a problem and then actually fixing it. It's much easier and more reliable to create the perception of a problem by promulgating lots of FUD, then engage in performative theatrics to nullify the FUD and proclaim the problem fixed.

Brystephor 2y ago
What's the difference between the perception of a problem being present and the existence of a problem? If you create an issue, and solve an issue, indifferent of the issue being real, you'll be credited with solving the issue. It's ridiculous at this scale
- Gormo 2y ago
  > What's the difference between the perception of a problem being present and the existence of a problem? Well, it would be the same as the distinction between real and imaginary in any other context.
  - dcow 2y ago
    Perception is reality
    - dymk 2y ago
      You can be passed out in the back seat but a car crash is still going to kill you
      - dcow 2y ago
        That’s not what the saying means, obviously -_-
        Gormo 2y ago

hackyhacky 2y ago

> it's crazy to see so much of a flip-flop so quickly. Trump was against Tiktok before he was for it. He was also against crypto currencies before he released his own.

JFingleton 2y ago
[flagged]
- hackyhacky 2y ago
  > People aren't allowed to change their minds? Sure they are, but they should explain why they changed their minds. In the case of meme coins like $TRUMP, it's hard to defend crypto as an investment or as a currency, which leaves the obvious reason: it's a scam. In the case of Trump, I'm sure he was all for crypto as soon as he realized that he personally could make money from it. Same goes for his NFT grift.
  - bdangubic 2y ago
    not sure why people still try to understand Trump after all these years him being a public figure. he does absolutely NOTHING and EVER which does not help his bottom line and benefit him personally. he’ll fucking steal money from a children’s charity which is about as low as humans go - the lowest scum of the earth to make a penny. hence him “changing his mind” (he was a democrat and was sucking clinton’s dicks for decades) has nothing to do with me and you changing our minds based on something we learned - for him there is a single thought - how can I profit from it.
    - secstate 2y ago
      Don't attempt to anthropomorphize Donald Trump. He's more like a lawn mower with daddy issues.
      - bdangubic 2y ago
        he’ll leave office as world’s first trillionaire so pretty expensive lawn mower

elfbargpt 2y ago

I think it's obvious that US lawmakers were somehow convinced ByteDance would absolutely divest from TikTok if threatened with an ultimatum. They were never prepared for an actual ban and the resulting fallout. Now that it's obvious they won't divest (which should have been obvious the entire time), they flipped

freeopinion 2y ago
Can you point to a lawmaker who has flipped?
- elfbargpt 2y ago
  Here's what Chuck Schumer said: "It's clear that more time is needed to find an American buyer and not disrupt the lives and livelihoods of millions of Americans of so many influencers who have built up a good network of followers" [1] The deal was divest or ban, not look for "more time to find a buyer". My point is they were never prepared for an actual ban. [1] https://x.com/kenklippenstein/status/1880007290830688609 https://x.com/kenklippenstein/status/1880007290830688609
  - __MatrixMan__ 2y ago
    Here we have a group of people that have given up on their duties re: checks and balances because following orders is easier. What a surprise that they're spineless in other ways too.
  - blitzar 2y ago
    Won't somebody think of the influencers.
    - anon7000 2y ago
      I think the bigger point is there are a lot of young people making really decent money on TikTok. (I know a few of them.) The result is a lot of push back from a lot of people who are effectively loosing their jobs. This is probably more clear to politicians now than it was a year ago, since the actual “threat” of the situation set in for more people.

appleorchard46 2y ago

> Has there been any other behavior like this in the past where a company "shut themselves down" to make a big political statement and then almost immediately undid the shut down? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_shutdowns_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_shutdowns_in_the_Un...

eru 2y ago
Well, different standards apply for government than for private companies.
scarab92 2y ago
Fiduciary responsibilities make it unlikely that many companies would risk it. There’s always a chance you don’t come back, and there’s likely to be a loss of marketshare for simply being unavailable for a period and forcing users to trial alternatives. But, TikTok is not purely commercially focused. A majority of the voting stock of ByteDance is held by the Chinese government, who clearly see non-financial strategic value in controlling it. Otherwise, they likely could have negotiated a spin out the US operation, whereby they retain most of the equity upside but give majority voting control to a US buyer.
- kelseydh 2y ago
  Can you imagine any other country making this demand and it being taken seriously? It is negotiation by means of extortion. Why are American tech companies entitled to the profits of an internationally used app?
  - bluesnews 2y ago
    They aren't demanding a sale. They are just saying they can't operate in the country if they don't sell. They have a choice to leave the country or follow the rules.
    - Timber-6539 2y ago

blahedo 2y ago

> flip-flop so quickly The timing and phrasing make it clear that this was planned and negotiated in advance, and the shutdown was just for show in order to be able to post a memo about how "President Trump" saved it. If actual negotiation had to occur, it would not have happened in the twelve hours between midnight and noon on Sunday morning. The point of the stunt was to persuade large numbers of younger folks that the Ds are the bad guys and Trump in particular is the hero. And it'll work as designed.

iknowSFR 2y ago
What’s the evidence of this? It seems highly plausible but do we have any proof besides speculation?
- willis936 2y ago
  My partner uses TikTok and was greeted with a message today saying that DJT saved the app. That isn't possible because he isn't president yet. It's all very embarrassing.
  - lubujackson 2y ago
    Also the CEO of TikTok is going to sit directly behind Trump at the inauguration. It's not even subtle and half the point is that it isn't subtle - bend the knee to Trump and you'll be taken care of, is the message. We operate just like Russia at this point. Also, expect to see that Facebook is partnering with TikTok on Monday morning. The head of the bill banning TikTok just invested 100 million in Meta... so I imagine there will be a followup announcement how Trump brokered some deal to Americanize TikTok or something.
    - ceejayoz 2y ago
      I got an internal ad on Facebook telling me to connect my TikTok account the other day. https://imgur.com/a/yCOpifC https://imgur.com/a/yCOpifC

sandworm101 2y ago

He who can destroy a thing controls that thing. Expect the new administration to have great influence on tiktok policy and content.

Grimblewald 2y ago
Already do and users are noticing. Ads have been introduce in a really obnixious facebook/instagram style and contebt moderation is more facebook/instagrem esq as well. It would surprise no one on the platform if meta has already aquired it, and it just needs to be announced.

nico 2y ago

> a company "shut themselves down" to make a big political statement They were following the law. Anything else is just promises by people who are not exactly known for following through with them Shutting down because the law says it, and to prevent really big penalties, is not making “a big political statement

acomms 2y ago
Nothing in the law changed since yesterday. This is only theatre.
aaronharnly 2y ago
The law did not require them to suspend the service.
- space_fountain 2y ago
  The law requires Oracle who hosts their data companies that provide cdn services to stop working with them. The law did require them to suspend service, but not quite as soon as they did and nothing had changed legally
- margalabargala 2y ago
  The law required them to choose from among several options, one of which was suspending the service. The law did not permit maintaining the status quo as an option.
  - kelnos 2y ago
    No, it does not at all require ByteDance to suspend service. It requires Apple and Google to stop distributing the app on their app stores, and it requires any US-based hosting providers that host TikTok services to stop providing those services. ByteDance could shut down any US-hosted services and serve from outside the US, and be entirely compliant with the law. The TikTok mobile app might become out of date and stop working (for people who already had it installed on their phones), but www.tiktok.com would continue to work just fine.

Aloisius 2y ago

Trump going soft on China was predictable.

MangoCoffee 2y ago
Trump's biggest backers, Elon Musk, Jeff Yass...etc. all have ties with China.
- swat535 2y ago
  People need to understand that politicians (dare I say everywhere?..) are just business man with dressing. They simply put up a show for people to win the votes and once they get elected, do whatever they can to make an extra buck. Trump, a convicted felon is certainly no different..
  - valval 2y ago
    [flagged]
blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
Was it? Apart from Elon’s dependence on China market for Tesla sales, I didn’t think so. Trump has been talking a lot about going hard against adversaries. The TikTok ban is something he supported. And it’s more popular on the right than left.

1a527dd5 2y ago

> Has there been any other behavior like this in the past where a company "shut themselves down" to make a big political statement and then almost immediately undid the shut down? OnlyFans did something similar: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OnlyFans#Restrictions_on_pornographic_creators https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OnlyFans#Restrictions_on_porno...

SilasX 2y ago
That wasn’t a political statement. Per your link, it was a belief that that could not continue the credit card payments while staying in compliance with the law.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

_heimdall 2y ago

Union strikes may fit that bill.

derektank 2y ago

The SOPA and PIPA protests were basically that

gnkyfrg 2y ago

[dead]

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

hot_gril 2y ago

Epic Games sorta did this to Fortnite, but the reversal wasn't quick

JKCalhoun 2y ago

It's like real life is playing like a shitty TV series. Constant cliff hangers, plot twists that never resolve....

bamboozled 2y ago
Agree, and the velocity is amazing, it's really hard to keep up with the shenanigans. In my opinion, it will have a negative impact on the economy, education, birth rates etc. Government should stay out of the way, and I don't want to hear about it every ten seconds, on the other hand, I don't want to have to read the news every five minutes to audit what they're doing.

paulddraper 2y ago

> Has there been any other behavior like this in the past where a company "shut themselves down" to make a big political statement and then almost immediately undid the shut down? A number of internet services (e.g. Wikipedia) shut down temporarily on Jan 18, 2012 as a political statement against SOPA.

chucknthem 2y ago

Uber has used this tactic many times in their early days. It mostly worked because citizens got used to cheap rides and got mad at their government for taking it away.

stuckkeys 2y ago

moonshine stopped working also. I guess it was under the same parent org. They all back to working now.

throwawayq3423 2y ago

> Political things aside, it's crazy to see so much of a flip-flop so quickly Trump has never had any issue he has not been on both sides of. He has no ideology, he does what benefits him in the moment at any given moment.

fundad 2y ago
According to the people I work with, all they care about is kids in cages. They value “tough talk” on immigration above anything else. Being influenced by Russia or China don’t even register.
- throwawayq3423 2y ago
  > all they care about is kids in cages To clear, they want kids in cages. Did I read that right?

kelnos 2y ago

> it's crazy to see so much of a flip-flop so quickly I wish people would understand that Trump has no ideology. Over a span of decades, Trump has been critical of liberals and conservatives, often at the same time. He's praised conservatives and liberals, often at the same time. His political positions are aligned with whatever benefits him the most. He doesn't care about making life better for the middle class. He doesn't care if immigration restrictions are relaxed or tightened. He doesn't care about whether or not transgender people have access to health care or can or can't serve in the military. He only cares what positions on those issues will benefit him and his friends at any given time. And if tomorrow holding the opposite position will benefit him more, he'll switch, just like that, and somehow convince his base that's what they believe too. Trump is the one who was championing the idea of a TikTok divestiture or ban, back when he was president the first time. He's only changed his mind on that because opposing the ban is better for him now.

nostromo 2y ago

The goal was always to get TikTok divested of Chinese ownership, not to ban it. The ban was the stick and selling it for a lot of money was the carrot. ByteDance surprised almost everyone in choosing the stick.

tw1984 2y ago
> ByteDance surprised almost everyone in choosing the stick. shortly after Trump tried to force bytedance to sell its shares during his first term, the Chinese government passed laws to include the recommendation systems used in social media into the export control list. bytedance thus won't be able to sell tiktok without approval from the chinese government.
- pjc50 2y ago
  Does anyone have a citation for this? Probably higher quality if it's in Chinese even if I have to machine translate it. Because that would be a clear pointer of suspicion.
  - tw1984 2y ago
    2020 report by nyt, paywalled of coursed https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/29/technology/china-tiktok-export-controls.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/29/technology/china-tiktok-e... the official export control list in Chinese https://www.most.gov.cn/tztg/202312/W020231221620858841394.pdf https://www.most.gov.cn/tztg/202312/W020231221620858841394.p... it is on the 29th page, with export control number 086501X, item 18.
    - pjc50 2y ago
      OK, that's pretty convincing. And it's interesting how much other stuff is in there like OCR for Hanzi!
myko 2y ago
> The goal was always to get TikTok divested of Chinese ownership, not to ban it. Seems like the goal pivoted recently - the goal is to keep TikTok Chinese and have them supporting the corrupt regime taking over the US, similar to other foreign adversaries have in the past

B-Con 2y ago

It had to have been a PR move. The Tik Tok in-app notes for "shutting down" and "we're back" both referenced Trump by name. I doubt they would do that without his explicit consent. Trump beamed his name and heroics directly into the eyeballs of 50m people before he even took office. That wouldn't have happened without the brief blip going dark. Odds are good he said he'd pardon them (which is a whole different story) but ensured they'd go dark for a few hours, either by withholding his guarantee or by directly coordinating it with them. This is Trump. It's always about him. If we haven't learned that we haven't learned anything.

tw1984 2y ago
like your conspiracy theory, lots of entertainments in it.
nprateem 2y ago
Ha ha are you serious? Trump is a fragile-egoed narcissist. He's not even in power and already everyone's sucking up to him.

flipbrad 2y ago

I dont think we know the actual range of motives for shutdown. Oracle may have forced it, for instance.

JoshTko 2y ago

Not exactly the same but ChatGPT's firing and rehiring of Sam Altman seems to be in the same vein

HWR_14 2y ago

In 2012 a coordinated action by 100,000 sites (including major platforms like Reddit, Wikipedia and Google) all went dark for 24 hours to protest SOPA, which was successful in killing the bill. Some only changed the color scheme and added a message but others shut down.

tekknik 2y ago
> which was successful in killing the bill the protests had no bearing on the outcome of the bill. most of us didn’t even know they were taking place.
- evolve2k 2y ago
  Sorry what?! I was in Australia and even from here it was obvious it was happening. Maybe go back refresh your mind on old HN posts. Sorry not meaning to be rude but the digital protests of the day were very significant. Lots of media coverage and site blackouts and banners and average punters waking up to the interruption. Stacks was going on. You can even watch Internets Own Boy doco where it’s covered.
  - tekknik 2y ago
    having lived through that period and relying on the internet to do my day job i didn’t notice. also if you look at the history of the bill, there is no mention of public opinion at all. They shelved the bill due to lack of agreement.
    - lolinder 2y ago
      Well, speak for yourself, not "most of us". On 01/18/2012 the HN front page was basically nothing but SOPA/PIPA content: https://news.ycombinator.com/front?day=2012-01-18 https://news.ycombinator.com/front?day=2012-01-18 As for your claim they had no effect, that's not what the sources from the time say—on the day of the protests 13 senators announced their opposition, including 5 former co-sponsors: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/01/pipa-support-collapses-with-13-new-opponents-in-senate/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/01/pipa-support-col... When you lose five co-sponsors in one day and that day happens to coincide with the internet shutting down, I don't find it very credible to try to claim that there was internal dissent all along.

FrustratedMonky 2y ago

What am I missing. Trump as a private citizen, can't issue a statement and automatically over-turn a law. If someone wants to enforce the law, they still can. It's still on the books, and Supreme Court upheld it.

hedora 2y ago

Heh; I thought you were talking about trump the first few times I read this. He appointed a bunch of corrupt Supreme Court judges, and they upheld an obviously unconstitutional law (bill of attainment). Now, on his first day in office, he gets to be a hero by unilaterally deciding not to enforce the law. So, moving forward, (1) we should expect increasingly unjust and draconian laws, and (2) as long as you do what Trump asks, you can break whatever federal laws you want. (Zukerberg, Bezos and Trump have already gotten in line for this.)

throw0101c 2y ago

> Political things aside, it's crazy to see so much of a flip-flop so quickly. "Rep. Mike Waltz calls out the Biden campaign's TikTok account: 'They should be ashamed'": * https://www.foxnews.com/video/6346831867112 https://www.foxnews.com/video/6346831867112 Waltz chosen as Trump's national security advisor: * https://www.npr.org/2024/11/11/nx-s1-5187098/trump-national-security-adviser-mike-waltz https://www.npr.org/2024/11/11/nx-s1-5187098/trump-national-... And currently "Trump security adviser doesn't rule out continued Chinese ownership of TikTok": * https://www.reuters.com/technology/trump-security-adviser-doesnt-rule-out-continued-chinese-ownership-tiktok-2025-01-19/ https://www.reuters.com/technology/trump-security-adviser-do... So ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

spandrew 2y ago

100% it's what happened. And the craziest part is that it worked because Biden went along with it. It's easy enough to argue Trump played hardball to negotiate for any divestiture that may occur; because that was his goal all along. The narrative/pundits can spin this easily in his favour. Either because they gave in to the ploy, or because they were unable to close a TikTok deal, the Democrats look incompetent here. And Trump gains favour in the younger demo (that he's already pretty strong in) AND with SMB because he gave TikTok more time.

dowager_dan99 2y ago
oh - and his true audience all along: an American oligarch is about to get at least half of TikTok for a steal. Anyone doing graft, corruption or just questionable wealth accumulation in the millions or single billions is going to look like small ball for at least the next four years.
- spandrew 2y ago
  Yeah it's just decent strategy on their part (I hate to say). Even if they don't profit directly off of the TikTok deal they look like absolute bosses for being able to "give" Americans what they wanted all along.