Vdawgp
Vdawgp t1_jcinwb7 wrote
Reply to comment by cookingboy in WSJ News Exclusive | U.S. Threatens Ban if TikTok’s Chinese Owners Don’t Sell Stakes by TheAngelMutants
Got it, so you’re resorting to technicalities. Obviously the version of Google that would be in China would have to play ball with the CCP and follow their rules on things like data governance and local control. So I ask again, if China is going to treat Western companies as adversaries on this topic, why should we lowering our walls and allow them to export authoritarianism through TikTok? It’s pretty simple; if TikTok is willing to sell off their US arm so that it’s not required to follow Chinese law (either implicit or explicit), than it should be banned for both the data and influence issues.
Vdawgp t1_jci4tas wrote
Reply to comment by cookingboy in WSJ News Exclusive | U.S. Threatens Ban if TikTok’s Chinese Owners Don’t Sell Stakes by TheAngelMutants
Yeah I’m sure they couldn’t censor their internet if they allowed Google, what an asinine argument lol
Vdawgp t1_jchu9vo wrote
Reply to comment by cookingboy in WSJ News Exclusive | U.S. Threatens Ban if TikTok’s Chinese Owners Don’t Sell Stakes by TheAngelMutants
This isn’t a personal freedom or free speech issue, it’s a data and influence issue. If China doesn’t trust Western social networks having their citizen’s data or subject to their algorithms, than we shouldn’t trust the CCP’s either. We wouldn’t have allowed the USSR to buy NBC, and I fail to see how this is any different.
Vdawgp t1_jcgy4s0 wrote
Reply to comment by cookingboy in WSJ News Exclusive | U.S. Threatens Ban if TikTok’s Chinese Owners Don’t Sell Stakes by TheAngelMutants
First off, there is proof of algorithm manipulation.
Second, I don’t understand how bringing up China banning Western social media is an argument against banning TikTok in its current state. Why are we playing to a double standard where they can ban our apps but we can’t ban theirs? If China does this because they believe Western social media would manipulate its contests to cause unrest, then they’d have no issue using TikTok to do the same and we shouldn’t allow it.
Vdawgp t1_jcgb5f4 wrote
Reply to comment by cookingboy in WSJ News Exclusive | U.S. Threatens Ban if TikTok’s Chinese Owners Don’t Sell Stakes by TheAngelMutants
Even if all the US data was sequestered perfectly and never got back to the CCP (something I have severe doubts about), banning it unless they sell is the right move IMO because, due to the CCP issue, the algorithm is subject to the changes China wants. We’ve already seen examples during the Hong Kong protests of different videos showing up based on if you searched about demonstrations in English vs. Chinese characters, and we should not be comfortable allowing the CCP to easily manipulating what we’re paying attention to.
Vdawgp t1_jcg9li1 wrote
Reply to comment by cgmcnama in WSJ News Exclusive | U.S. Threatens Ban if TikTok’s Chinese Owners Don’t Sell Stakes by TheAngelMutants
Yeah I agree, can’t stand the guy but he was in the right about banning it. Just wish that he didn’t go about it in a shoddy way that wouldn’t have held up in court and we could’ve gotten to this point a while ago.
Vdawgp t1_ja5oj4s wrote
Reply to comment by rustyclown617 in Burying Moses' biggest middle finger to the city? Plan to tunnel the BQE being discussed by scooterflaneuse
Ahem; as a Bostonian parachuting in I would like to say that in the context of what was being done, the Big Dig was well managed. They used the existing Elevated Artery as support struts to tunnel underneath, extended 90 under Fort Point to Logan, reconnected the North End to Boston, all while not shutting down any roads. They performed the equivalent of brain surgery on a patient while still awake. Is there certain things I’d like them to have done better? Yes (don’t source screws from a negligent contractor, actually build NSRL while your at it, built housing on the useless green space). But by and large, I think you can argue it was the most successfully run mega project in the US since LBJ.
Vdawgp t1_j8nrqb0 wrote
Reply to Most towns are going along with the state’s new multifamily housing law. Not Middleborough. by TouchDownBurrito
We should take a page out of the SB50 book and have a builder’s remedy for towns that refuse to do anything
Vdawgp t1_j6n6cz8 wrote
Reply to Extremly Unrealistic Fantasy MBTA Subway map. The Silver Line is converted into light rail. Let me know what your favorite part of the map is and what I missed. by Wide_right_yes
If we’re really swinging for the fences, then I would include some bored commuter rail tunnels out to Logan so that the Newbury/Rockport line can have an Airport stop. And while we’re at it, may as well add each terminal onto the Blue Line.
Vdawgp t1_iu5rgce wrote
Reply to comment by UtterNylon in What’s your favorite paid app(s) and why? by thevillagerok
Yeah I couldn’t get into it, Narwhal is much more natural for me
Vdawgp t1_jcitb9n wrote
Reply to comment by cookingboy in WSJ News Exclusive | U.S. Threatens Ban if TikTok’s Chinese Owners Don’t Sell Stakes by TheAngelMutants
I respect and agree with the argument that we need comprehensive data protection and algorithm transparency laws. That makes sense.
My fundamental disagreement with you is the level of concern about TikTok specifically. The fact is that ByteDance has to, whether willingly or unwillingly, do what the CCP asks. There is evidence of algorithm manipulation. The CCP does have those levers. We’ve seen ByteDance work with the CCP very openly. As Ben Thompson says, China is using their access to push their ideals. And as Matt Yglesias says, allowing TikTok would be no different from the US allowing the Soviets to buy NBC during the Cold War.
For me banning or forcing TikTok to divest is a five alarm fire we have to take care of, while comprehensive user protection laws are the asbestos in the walls of the house next door that probably should’ve been removed a while ago, but not the main concern with the fire going.