|
koolkal posted:But there's already been multiple notable right-wing billionaires saying they want to buy it. Why would your assumption be that it would go to a generic public company and remain the same? Even if a Koch Brother or whoever buys it and folds into their portfolio, as long as they dont go out and rebrand it Trumpstan88 or something (i.e. the Musk method), no one will give a poo poo
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 17:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 23:36 |
|
|
Shammypants posted:The data suggests that young people basically only use Tiktok, Snapchat, Instagram and Youtube (if you can call it social media). That's it. That's coming from 44% using Facebook in 2012. Tiktok content creators are on another level of reporting and information sharing. Take for example vaccine denialism. The doctors on TikTok who combated misinformation were simply better than any other platform anywhere in any form. That's one of a million examples. TikTok is profoundly responsible. I wasn't even thinking of the vaccine thing. That feels so much longer than a year ago. Yeah, I'm a high-horse "wear a respirator when needed" and "get your booster annually, guys" issue stumper as well, Tiktok did a great job of currying a userbase of good communicators who were spot on with combating antivax grifters and vaccine hesitancy. Not that that kind of content isn't also on IG, Youtube (cough breadtube) and whatnot. it just has great reach on Tiktok.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 17:48
|
|
|
Nissin Cup Nudist posted:Even if a Koch Brother or whoever buys it and folds into their portfolio, as long as they dont go out and rebrand it Trumpstan88 or something (i.e. the Musk method), no one will give a poo poo Twitter flipping to chud was extremely extremely bad, TikTok also flipping chud would be a nightmare. People gave a poo poo and will give a poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 17:50
|
|
|
Shammypants posted:Twitter flipping to chud was extremely extremely bad, TikTok also flipping chud would be a nightmare. People gave a poo poo and will give a poo poo. But twitter was always chud?
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 17:52
|
|
|
I mean, worry about Chinese control is nothing new, nor the only concern. It's not unique to TikTok, but the ability to investigate and regulate it is much less than other companies. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_of_TikTok "Multiple governmental agencies and private businesses have imposed or attempted to impose temporary or indefinite bans on the social media service TikTok due to concerns from the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, national security, China's ownership and influence,[1] pornography, human trafficking,[2][3] children's safety, antisemitism,[4][5] addictiveness, terrorism[6] and toxic content.[7][8]"
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 17:52
|
|
|
Nissin Cup Nudist posted:But twitter was always chud? Compared to now, really?
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 17:53
|
|
|
Nissin Cup Nudist posted:Even if a Koch Brother or whoever buys it and folds into their portfolio, as long as they dont go out and rebrand it Trumpstan88 or something (i.e. the Musk method), no one will give a poo poo But why is that your assumption of how it would be used? The entire reason why people like O'Leary and Kotick want it is because they understand the value of a media as a propaganda tool. That's worth more to them than whatever revenue Tiktok generates. For a boring company to buy it, you are saying that Tiktok is more valuable as a money-generating tool than as a propaganda tool, enough so that a company interested purely in generating revenue would outbid a person interested in generating revenue + manipulating it to spread propaganda. How does that make sense exactly? It would be the equivalent of someone buying Twitter for more than $44 billion solely for the purposes of making money.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 17:54
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:The extremely dumbed down tl;dr version is: Thank you for this post. With this context, it's clear that there actually is a good faith rationale for this. The US does not have an equivalent law that requires a backdoor for the government to use, and that's a very important distinction. Not to say there aren't a million ways to advocate for the 'ban' in bad faith, but at least this shows that it's not as absurd as it appears.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 17:54
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:GOP financials Hot drat, thanks for the spoonfeeding there.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 17:54
|
|
|
koolkal posted:But there's already been multiple notable right-wing billionaires saying they want to buy it. Why would your assumption be that it would go to a generic public company and remain the same? Musk is an idiot who hosed up Twitter and as a result its value, like, quartered. Even the right wing billionaires (who absolutely would do things to make it worse and more right wing) don't just want to set their own money on fire, so they have the normal "I don't want my investment to get cut into 1/4th of its value" pressure
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 17:55
|
|
|
Shammypants posted:Compared to now, really? Mmm there's some substance there; Twitter was famously incapable of banning honest-to-god neonazis even back in the "good" days. Their head of safety Yoel Roth came under fire in particular when his internal communications were made public, wherein he was constantly specifically figuring out how to actively make space for right wing extremism on the platform by modifying their Terms & Conditions and their hate speech and harassment policies post-hoc.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 17:56
|
|
|
Yeah, that's just another correlation. Potato Salad posted:When the conversation steers to "Its lovely to hear your thoughts on XYZ, frankly this is heartwarming to me, where did this journey start for you" etc, it really is Tiktok Shock that has (I hate saying this) literally woken them up. So, no? Again, I'm not trying to be a dick (glad we're on the same communicative page, here), but that's not actual evidence. People can identify TikTok as a means by which they get news, they even give it credit for it, but that doesn't actually mean anything. People are famously awful at identifying poo poo like that. It took us a couple thousand years to realize heavier things don't fall faster, and there are still some holdouts there. Toy example just to show what I mean : what if the actual cause was something else (e.g. the rise of the open fascism in the right wing, the pandemic isolation leading to people being increasingly online, magic bees from mars mind-controlling kids, whatever) but since TikTok is the thing they're using, it's the most proximate tool, people give that the credit because it's hard/unintuitive to imagine an alternative timeline where events happened differently.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 17:57
|
|
|
tractor fanatic posted:Can you substantiate this please? They had documents leaked in 2021 showing that they secretly participated in developing portions of China's domestic spying program, despite previous denials, and hacks at the African Union HQ were linked to Huawei routers that were installed when it was built by Chinese contractors. The projects included voice analysis and recording, location tracking, and corporate monitoring that it had previously claimed it had not developed or deployed. quote:Documents link Huawei to China’s surveillance programs https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2021/12/14/huawei-surveillance-china/ In 2013, the U.S. alleged that intellectual property and security information from U.S. private businesses was shared with the Chinese government by Huawei. quote:In an extraordinary interview with the Australian Financial Review newspaper, General Michael Hayden alleged that Huawei has shared “intimate and extensive knowledge of the foreign telecommunications systems” with the Chinese state. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/10191154/Ex-CIA-chief-accuses-Huawei-of-industrial-espionage.html In 2012, the Australian government found backdoors in Huawei software that they were not told about and were used to launch cyber attacks. They were then banned from bidding on government tech projects. quote:The federal government has banned Chinese technology giant Huawei from participating in multibillion- dollar tenders to supply equipment to the national broadband network because of concerns over cyber attacks originating in China. https://web.archive.org/web/20121105214519/http://www.afr.com/p/technology/china_giant_banned_from_nbn_9U9zi1oc3FXBF3BZdRD9mJ In 2016, Canada expelled three Huawei telecommunications workers for spying. quote:Canada's immigration department is planning to deny permanent resident visas to three Chinese citizens who work for Chinese telecom titan Huawei over concerns the applicants are involved in espionage, terrorism, and government subversion. https://www.vice.com/en/article/8x37xb/canada-plans-to-reject-chinese-workers-on-suspicion-they-could-be-spies
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 17:57
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:Mmm there's some substance there; Twitter was famously incapable of banning honest-to-god neonazis even back in the "good" days. Their head of safety Yoel Roth came under fire in particular when his discussions specifically figuring out how to actively make space for right wing extremism on the platform by modifying their Terms & Conditions and their hate speech and harassment policies post-hoc. The question is are they far more chuddy now than before the takeover. It's almost too absurd of a question to ask. Twitter is the social media platform that almost immediately started promoting right-wingers to virtually everyone within weeks of the takeover. Analysis shows the number of bots hasn't really declined but now they simply target people in more chuddy ways. The use of rules are uneven, the use of banning/probations uneven, and on and on.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 17:58
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:Yeah, that's just another correlation. I will not be able to provide the evidence you're looking for. I want to be responsive but I don't have it at a large scale. I'm not Pew, and I'm not aware of anyone looking specifically into the roles various media sites have played in the presence or lack of political engagement in the current generation of new voters. Edit: if I had actual power in the Dems even at a state level, I'd be dumping some money into finding out what the hell is going on there pronto and see to what degree the yet-uncudgeled-left on Tiktok could be nurtured, but alas. Lord only knows that research funds have probably been spent learning how TO cudgel it, frankly. Potato Salad fucked around with this message at 18:01 on Mar 13, 2024 |
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 17:59
|
|
|
selec posted:What was the misinformation? And it got a lot of people politically engaged? That’s a good thing. Americans should be calling and demanding things from our politicians more. Acting like that’s a bad thing seems anti-democratic and hell, I’ll say it, anti-American to me. It was an unhealthy, temporary, and counterproductive kind of "political engagement". For one thing, a lot of the callers were children, who can't vote or advocate and also were not supposed to be using the app at all. Many of the callers didn't express any coherent political desires at the staffers who answered. Many more just hung up after getting a connection, because the alert was structured to imply that calling was required to resume using tiktok and that a full ban was imminent (these parts are the misinformation). These callers were never engaged and won't stay engaged after this incident, they were leveraged by ByteDance for their own purposes and it blew up in their faces The paywall is fighting me so I can't post excerpts, but: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/07/business/tiktok-phone-calls-congress.html
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 18:00
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:I will not be able to provide the evidence you're looking for. I want to be responsive but I don't have it at a large scale. I'm not Pew, and I'm not aware of anyone looking specifically into the roles various media sites have played in the presence or lack of political engagement in the current generation of new voters. Yep, I am happy with just seeing it happen, seeing the trends of likes/follows/reposts, seeing young people talk at school. Maybe it's anecdotal but I am fine with that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 18:00
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:Consider why you're so keen to rapidly reject boots-on-the-ground viewpoints on the american information ecosystem. That’s a general problem with “boots-on-the-ground” information. I am often paid professionally to collect and document that type of information. There is a general devaluation of informed observation to mere anecdote.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 18:01
|
|
|
Shammypants posted:The question is are they far more chuddy now than before the takeover. It's almost too absurd of a question to ask. Twitter is the social media platform that almost immediately started promoting right-wingers to virtually everyone within weeks of the takeover. Analysis shows the number of bots hasn't really declined but now they simply target people in more chuddy ways. The use of rules are uneven, the use of banning/probations uneven, and on and on. I managed to stay relatively insulated from RW bullshit on Twitter for over a decade (mainly following dumb sports / comedy / science content), then within a month of the Elon takeover it was nonstop Tim Poole / Catturd / Ian Miles Cheong spam, all the time. It's a completely lost platform, doomed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 18:02
|
|
|
Shammypants posted:Compared to now, really? Ive never been to twitter, ever, but I do remember all the posts here about how @jack had his thumbs on the scale for a long time. Is it that much worse under Musk?
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 18:02
|
|
|
Nissin Cup Nudist posted:Ive never been to twitter, ever, but I do remember all the posts here about how @jack had his thumbs on the scale for a long time. Is it that much worse under Musk? Yes. As a poster just mentioned my entire experience on Twitter changed after the takeover. I was suddenly seeing right wing promoted content, I was experiencing a different flow of information. A lot of people also left the platform or use it differently now, so that migration has also shifted the balance.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 18:03
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/MichaelSLinden/status/1767942598830821627 https://twitter.com/MichaelSLinden/status/1767942876908909046 Pretty remarkable how accurate the CBO predictions were until COVID hit.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 18:04
|
|
|
Nissin Cup Nudist posted:Ive never been to twitter, ever, but I do remember all the posts here about how @jack had his thumbs on the scale for a long time. Is it that much worse under Musk? Jack was kind of a bog standard libertarian. Musk is a straight up racist MAGA piece of poo poo. It is funny that every time I happen to open it now I'm greeted by ads for random lovely as seen on tv products because he's driven off all the big name advertisers.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 18:05
|
|
|
Shammypants posted:The question is are they far more chuddy now than before the takeover. I just want to mark this, because it is not the question. It is entirely possible to have unacceptable nazi (etc.) tolerance before and after the sale.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 18:07
|
|
|
Shammypants posted:The question is are they far more chuddy now than before the takeover. It's almost too absurd of a question to ask. Twitter is the social media platform that almost immediately started promoting right-wingers to virtually everyone within weeks of the takeover. Analysis shows the number of bots hasn't really declined but now they simply target people in more chuddy ways. The use of rules are uneven, the use of banning/probations uneven, and on and on. You've changed the goalposts. Twitter being more chuddy post musk doesn't mean they weren't a right wing hellscape pre musk, it just means that Twitter has gone from the fifth level of hell to the seventh.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 18:07
|
|
|
haveblue posted:It was an unhealthy, temporary, and counterproductive kind of "political engagement". For one thing, a lot of the callers were children, who can't vote or advocate and also were not supposed to be using the app at all. Many of the callers didn't express any coherent political desires at the staffers who answered. Many more just hung up after getting a connection, because the alert was structured to imply that calling was required to resume using tiktok and that a full ban was imminent (these parts are the misinformation). Here you go. You claim a lot of the callers were children who weren't supposed to be in the app -- how do you know this? The article says "teenagers." Anyone who is a teenager is allowed to be on all major social media platforms. Possible TikTok Ban Prompts Users to Inundate Congress With Phone Calls www.nytimes.com - Thu, 07 Mar 2024 posted:You have been granted access, use your keyboard to continue reading.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 18:08
|
|
|
Bar Ran Dun posted:That’s a general problem with “boots-on-the-ground” information. I am often paid professionally to collect and document that type of information. I make no qualms about accepting that I am one data point, and an anecdotal one at that. mawarannahr posted:Here you go. You claim a lot of the callers were children who weren't supposed to be in the app -- how do you know this? The article says "teenagers." Anyone who is a teenager is allowed to be on all major social media platforms. Thanks, 12ft ladder is pretty bad now  Shammypants posted:The question is are they far more chuddy now than before the takeover. It's almost too absurd of a question to ask. Twitter is the social media platform that almost immediately started promoting right-wingers to virtually everyone within weeks of the takeover. Analysis shows the number of bots hasn't really declined but now they simply target people in more chuddy ways. The use of rules are uneven, the use of banning/probations uneven, and on and on. For sure. Its way the gently caress worse now -- the platform actively boosts right wing extremism far more than it ever has before, and the owner is constantly race baiting and bashing women and queer people from his comfortable ketamine hole. Potato Salad fucked around with this message at 18:10 on Mar 13, 2024 |
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 18:08
|
|
|
I am at the point now where I don't even click into twitter links to read them from here, because I know the replies will be endless fascist diarrhea regardless of the topic Elon's influence swerved the platform hard to the right which IMO has created a negative feedback loop where now the active fash know they can say whatever they want and get away with it, so it just keeps getting worse as sane people abandon it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 18:09
|
|
|
PharmerBoy posted:I just want to mark this, because it is not the question. It is entirely possible to have unacceptable nazi (etc.) tolerance before and after the sale. No it is the question. You have more racism, more antisemitism and more prejudice now than before. It was unacceptable before and worse now so it's kind of weird to suggest goalpost moving. Goalpost moving would be if I said "twitter did a fine job handling such issues before." At the very least it was more hospitable to efforts to root it out, AT LEAST. If we disagree there than I have nothing to contribute to such a conversation any longer. Edit- It bears noting that if you want TikTok to be a right wing hellscape, oh boy can you curate it to be so. Go check out some political lives for example. However it seems obvious to me that it is more likely to target individuals who cross certain lines than it would be if Musk or Koch owned the platform.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 18:10
|
|
|
The larger context of the question is the conversation about what the effect of a sale would have on TikTok. I'm reading your post as both a)there is a difference in Twitter's tolerance of the far-right, and b)it's a significant difference. Ultimately, I'm objecting to the idea that Twitter was once a left-wing haven similar to what TikTok is alleged to be, and the only reason it's not is the sale to Elon. If you're trying to get at something else, apologies and please clarify. Dueling edits here, but I'm now seeing your edit that makes that more apparent.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 18:16
|
|
|
I don't disagree with all the Twitter descriptions, but just to clarify, there is a small difference from a legal/national security perspective between the Twitter and TikTok situations. Elon made Twitter shittier and that is bad from a user perspective, but the U.S. government really doesn't care at all about user experience on Twitter. They don't really care about the user experience on TikTok either. It is basically just because TikTok is so prevalent (allegedly 100+ million active users in the U.S., but I have no idea how they measure that because that would mean roughly 35 to 40% of all Americans over age 12 are "active" TikTok users) and China's new (as in around 7 years old) security law. They have been trying to ban TikTok since 2016 when it was just advertisements for OnlyFans and dance videos. If it was owned by anyone other than China, they wouldn't care. So, on the one hand, it really is all "because China" and there is no proof that TikTok has been used for spying in that way at all right now. On the other hand, I can kind of see why you would not want to set up a software program where all the data can be viewed by the Chinese government and potentially have software injected to the app from the Chinese government onto 1/3 of all personal devices in the country if you didn't trust the Chinese government. Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 18:22 on Mar 13, 2024 |
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 18:16
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:I don't disagree with all the Twitter descriptions, but just to clarify, there is a small difference from a legal/national security perspective between the Twitter and TikTok situations. Yeah, it's kind of funny that for all the hay that Democrats make about Republicans and fascism and democracy and the future of America, they largely view them as a much smaller threat than China. While I (and many, many others) see it as the complete opposite.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 18:20
|
|
|
PharmerBoy posted:Dueling edits here, but I'm now seeing your edit that makes that more apparent. There was a very interesting tiktoker/psychologist who experimented with how long it would take to go down various rabbit holes. I can probably find the videos detailing the experiment, but more or less within 1 hour of clicking you had an alt-right darling social media platform that was carefully curated and spewing all kinds of nonsense. I'm not suggesting it's a left wing bastion or anything like that per se, but that it is not uncommon to see videos that are racist, antisemetic etc. get eliminated rather quickly from the platform. I do not see the same efforts being taken on Twitter.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 18:22
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Newsweek sums up the cash problems pretty well, though this was written before McDaniel's ouster: Dems look to be fairly low on money too.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 18:23
|
|
|
Shammypants posted:There was a very interesting tiktoker/psychologist who experimented with how long it would take to go down various rabbit holes. I can probably find the videos detailing the experiment, but more or less within 1 hour of clicking you had an alt-right darling social media platform that was carefully curated and spewing all kinds of nonsense. I'm not suggesting it's a left wing bastion or anything like that per se, but that it is not uncommon to see videos that are racist, antisemetic etc. get eliminated rather quickly from the platform. I do not see the same efforts being taken on Twitter. Is this the one? It's someone's MA thesis. https://qspace.library.queensu.ca/bitstream/handle/1974/30197/Boucher_Vincent_202206_MA.pdf?sequence=2 quote:Down the TikTok rabbit hole: Testing the TikTok algorithm’s contribution to right wing extremist radicalization
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 18:24
|
|
|
Triskelli posted:Dems look to be fairly low on money too. They are not
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 18:24
|
|
|
But they FEEL low on money, and isn't that what matters?
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 18:33
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:I essentially ask you in return, "If the danger is so present, why isn't anyone in congress able to give anything substantive, instead just grandstanding or taking about camera-eye-dilation-heroin"? The actual answer is that they’d have to admit what we do. Historically the US has used communications technology to collect foreign intelligence. Even before the internet back to radios and Xerox machines. The US is aware of the information that can be collected from the app, because we collect similar information from similar apps used by the entire world. To talk about the danger they have to talk about what the US is doing and they aren’t going to do that, so they fabricate social reasons. I don’t think we will get an honest conversation in Congress or in the media about it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 18:34
|
|
|
mawarannahr posted:Here you go. You claim a lot of the callers were children who weren't supposed to be in the app -- how do you know this? The article says "teenagers." Anyone who is a teenager is allowed to be on all major social media platforms. Fair enough, retracted. But here are some other testimonials about how Tiktok was really not helping their own cause: https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2024/03/07/congress/tiktok-users-revolt-00145633 quote:“It’s so so bad. Our phones have not stopped ringing. They’re teenagers and old people saying they spend their whole day on the app and we can't take it away,” one House GOP staffer told POLITICO, granted anonymity to speak candidly.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 18:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 23:36 |
|
|
On a tangential note, this bill also gives the President the ability to ban essentially any application controlled by a Chinese company. You will get my vote if you ban League of Legends, Joe.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 18:39
|
|