• _cryptagion@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    13 days ago

    Honestly, I don’t see any downsides to this. Tiktok and Instagram are horrible platforms that are actively hurting, and in some cases killing, young teens. Sure, they did it for propaganda reasons, but that doesn’t mean it’s not a net positive.

    • helpImTrappedOnline@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      13 days ago

      For me the downside is the precedent it sets. Yes, most of us agree getting rid of TikTok is a good thing, but how long until they start banning other sites “for the children”? How long until they target federated sites they can’t control “for the children”?

      To top it off, it doesn’t solve the data harvesting problem their so scared of with TikTok. They only care about that one because the data is going to China. Instagram and others can stay because they are American companies spying on citizens.

      • maplebar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        12 days ago

        This is a slippery slope argument.

        The “problem” re TikTok is that they are a Chinese company with ties to the Chinese government who have managed to get a closed source black box app on millions of Americans phones that servers as about the most perfect avenue for social/political manipulation as any adversary could dream of.

        The solution to that problem that was offered to TikTok more than a year ago was to simply sell to an American company (and thus a company that could in theory be held somewhat accountable, but probably not if we’re being honest) for doing bad things here in the USA. ByteDance would have made billions of dollars selling the American version of TikTok, but they knowingly chose the other option, which was to face a ban at the end of this year.

        FWIW, American companies cannot operator or sell product in China without going through a Chinese company, and social media platforms like Facebook are banned in China, so in my opinion some degree of reciprocity here is at least warranted.

        • EngineerGaming@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          12 days ago

          I don’t see a problem with a slippery slope here though. Given how many people would have a strong motivation to evade said censorship, they would likely use it as an excuse to improve their censorship infrastructure.

      • _cryptagion@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        12 days ago

        I understand your argument, and I don’t disagree with it. Nor do I agree with the absolutely ridiculous reasons the government has given for the ban. It’s the end result that doesn’t bother me.

        As for federated sites, they aren’t as threatened as you might think. Sure, the government could shut some of them down if they tried. But that’s only true for those that are hosted and ran by people in jurisdictions that the US government can affect. That’s the strength of federation. Not only can platforms like Lemmy not turn out like Twitter, since you can defederate from instances that allow things like white supremacy, effectively purging those types of people from the fediverse at large, the decentralized nature of the system means that there’s no practical way for any one government to take down the entire ecosystem. A good example of governments trying to take down something they collectively hate, is piracy. Even united behind the cause of capitalism, and with the billions of dollars of the recording and motion picture industries behind them, nations across the world have not had great success in stopping piracy of any kind, mostly due to the patchwork nature of takedowns. I don’t have any fear that the US government would be any more effective in tackling federated platforms.

        I would go so far as to say that federated sites are the only social media people should be using, because it’s much easier to control things like disinformation, since the power in adjusting the flow of information isn’t centralized to one group with one agenda. Some would say that just creates an echo chamber, and for some instances that’s true. But unless those admins defederate from everyone, their users are going to be exposed to viewpoints that disturb that echo chamber, from places they don’t have power to control.

      • _cryptagion@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        13 days ago

        Yeah, normally I would say fuck the government, but in this case it’s exactly the same as the people who got pissy about Juul getting in trouble for targeting children. I’m all for “freedom to choose”, as long as whatever it is you’re choosing isn’t directly targeting kids with something that has an actively detrimental effect on their health, and that’s being tracked as an emergent medical problem by psychiatrists around the world.

        • Fedizen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          edit-2
          13 days ago

          the law doesn’t protect kids tho, everybody who supports this law has to rant about how bad social media is but at the end of the day the law is only about foreign companies. It just says instagram has the right to do all the same shit as tiktok and the only problem the gov has with tiktok is its not US owned.

          News Flash: If you gotta lie about what the law is for to justify it, you’re part of the misinformation problem.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            13 days ago

            It’s a step in the right direction and it can certainly inspire future laws.

            People want to get everything all at once when that rarely happens, especially with governments. So much impatience in this world.

          • _cryptagion@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            13 days ago

            I didn’t lie, I specifically stated they weren’t doing it for altruistic reasons. But the why isn’t what’s important to me. If them being shitty is a net positive, then I don’t really give a shit.

    • JackbyDev@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      13 days ago

      You don’t see any downside to the government banning a platform people use for communication? That doesn’t sound like a problem of overreach at all?

      Also, you know other platforms are just gonna take its place. Reels and Shorts will still exist. Depending on how the sell goes, it’s possible TikTok itself won’t go away and might be unchanged as far as users are concerned.

      • _cryptagion@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        13 days ago

        I don’t get why people like you are being dishonest. Just admit you like TikTok and don’t want it to go. You don’t need to frame it as a supposed free speech issue, I would respect your option more if you were honest.

        Either way, I don’t feel like hearing more about your body, so I’m blocking you too.

        • JackbyDev@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          12 days ago

          Why the fuck would you tell me to respond in a specific way and also say you’re blocking me? So dramatic.

          Yes, I like TikTok. Even if I hated it it wouldn’t change my opinion on this. I use pretty much all popular social media from time to time except for Snapchat and Instagram. I’m not being dishonest. I was never hiding anything.

          You’re entire position is that this is okay because social media is bad, but that had zero impact on Congress’s decision. It’s like the government bulldozing your neighbor’s house for a road and saying “That person was annoying, this is a good thing.”

      • _cryptagion@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        13 days ago

        If you are actually serious about asking, then I’m sure you can find no shortage of articles interviewing doctors regarding the perils of social media on young minds, or news reports linking dozens of teen suicides to the network. That’s a rabbit hole that’s deep enough that some psychologists have dedicated their entire careers to studying it. The problem isn’t unique to TikTok, it just happens to be one of the worst offenders, considering how popular the short video format is, compared to something like Twitter.

        I feel like, judging from the tone of your comment, that you’re not really interested in knowing, so I’m not going to bother linking you anything.

          • _cryptagion@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            edit-2
            13 days ago

            Peer reviewed science.

            Listen, we both know your mind is made up. You’re not actually interested in the science. Let’s not pretend you are, or that you’re open to changing your mind on the matter.

            Now, I’m not saying you have to admit you just desperately want TikTok to keep being a thing. I’m not saying that, because I don’t have the patience to sit here and waste time arguing with you, so I’m going to block you immediately after writing this. That way, I don’t have to listen to you move the goalposts, and you can get back to doomscrolling through dance videos. We both save time.

            Don’t bother replying.