this post was submitted on 08 Mar 2024
612 points (97.5% liked)

Technology

59106 readers
3456 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] affiliate@lemmy.world 65 points 8 months ago (4 children)

Many users called lawmakers' offices to complain, congressional staffers told Politico. "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 was quoted as saying.

and they still voted 50-0. really tells you something about how much these politicians are willing to listen to their constituents.

[–] FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today 51 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (25 children)

It was a 50-0 to pass the commission and then go to the House floor for a vote and then the Senate for a vote and finally signed into law by the president unless he vetoes it, which is possible imo.

Honestly, teenagers and old people are the sorts of folks that need to be protected from themselves, I might just call in to my local representative to voice my support of forced sale, operating restrictions, or even outright ban.

EDIT: I sent him an email.

[–] ikidd@lemmy.world 48 points 8 months ago (1 children)
[–] FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today 15 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Love to, I think the 5 Bn USD FTC fine was a little light considering no jailtime was given. I hope their recent lawsuits lead to breaking the company up again.

[–] affiliate@lemmy.world 20 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (14 children)

what are you even trying to say here? that it’s okay for politicians to ignore entire demographics? or that it’s only okay for them to ignore entire demographics if, ultimately, it’s left up to a different group of politicians to pass the law?

i don’t use tiktok or have any interest in the app itself, but it’s still very alarming to see a vote go through 50-0 despite a “nonstop” flood of calls opposing it.

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] Krauerking@lemy.lol 16 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Yeah honestly if a bunch of addicted teens and old people were calling me screaming that I can't take away their drug of choice when that's not even what's happening, and it's not being taken away just moved to where there can be more control on quality.... Then I would be really considering the damage this is doing to them.

I don't know if supporting the junkies being taken advantage of is the altruistic take that these "absolute freedom" supporters think it is.

[–] Misconduct@startrek.website 7 points 8 months ago (2 children)

The fact that you guys just ate up that rhetoric without any hesitation... Like, you just happily believe it's a bunch of "addicted old people and teenagers"? Is this reddit? Did I make a wrong turn at common sense and critical thinking?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Misconduct@startrek.website 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (3 children)

It's not just teenagers and old people. That's just some bullshit rhetoric that you ate right up without question. Because of course you did. Millennials/middle age folk are abundant on TikTok as well as young adults.

The audacity of some of you to jump into action just to spite "teenagers and old people" is shameful. So easily manipulated.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (21 replies)
[–] Atyno@dmv.social 5 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

From what I read, the calls actually evaporated opposition to the bill.

Which, I'm NGL, if you're worried about an app being used by a foreign adversary to encourage anti-social behavior in your youth, a bunch of people calling in acting like drug addicts getting their drugs taken away is only going to erase doubts.

It doesn't help that they'd even be more justified when it's known that it was caused by users getting pushed notified by Tik Tok to do it.

[–] BreakDecks@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Encouraging people to contact their representatives and demand action? Congress clearly can't have this. How will they do their jobs if they are constantly forced to engage with their constituents?

[–] nialv7@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

Call to action from, say, activist groups is very different from call to action from a billion-dollar company. This does make me really worried about how much influencer TikTok has on people ngl

[–] BreakDecks@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 months ago

How many of us stood up for net neutrality at the behest of Reddit?

[–] Atyno@dmv.social 2 points 8 months ago

In my opinion, considering Tiktok's algo they had the best circumstance to notify a mix of their users more aligned with the actual electorate. The fact they ended up with the worst representation of their user base when it came to confirming the suspicions of politicians says everything.

[–] ShepherdPie@midwest.social 5 points 8 months ago

It also tells you something about all the supposed gridlock in Washington that can magically evaporate when there's money and power to be gained from it.

[–] realharo@lemm.ee 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Are they "taking it away" though? Do normal people care about who owns it? Are they just worried about an unlikely ban?

[–] affiliate@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

you’re taking it as a given that bytedance will sell the app if this law passes. there is a chance that they won’t want to sell and then the app will be banned. (but i think this unlikely.)

also, if i’m understanding things correctly, there’s the possibility that they do sell and the app still gets banned. the article says

An app would be allowed to stay in the US market after a divestiture if the president determines that the sale "would result in the relevant covered company no longer being controlled by a foreign adversary."

depending on who the next president is, there’s no guarantee that they’ll say any sale will result in the company not being controlled by a foreign adversary. (although this past is just speculation.)

anyways. this bill will certainly raise the chances that the app will be banned in the US. (and it opens the door for other apps to get banned if the US doesn’t like the country they were developed in.)

[–] realharo@lemm.ee 0 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

I also just noticed in the article:

TikTok urged its users to protest the bill, sending a notification that said, "Congress is planning a total ban of TikTok... Let Congress know what TikTok means to you and tell them to vote NO."

Also from a BBC article about the same thing:

Earlier, users of the app had received a notification urging them to act to "stop a TikTok shutdown."

So they were literally sending out misleading notifications (because a forced sale is not a total ban), and then the users wrote to Congress based on that...

The probability that they will sell seems really high to me, as the same thing almost happened back in 2020.

[–] Misconduct@startrek.website 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

They also claimed that it was only "old people and teenagers" who were calling in and objecting which wasn't true. One rep stood up and straight up lied claiming that TikTok users were "forced" to call. How would that even work? TikTok possibly being banned isn't a lie but all that other shit sure was. It was just a popup offering to help locate local reps to call and make their voices heard. The fact that any of you are pretending that people taking this democratic action is a bad thing is appalling and your bias is blatantly obvious. The absolute ego on all of you to act like you just know better than all of those other people because... Reasons? Ridiculous.

[–] realharo@lemm.ee 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Do you have the full text of the notification that you could post here? Kinda hard discussing the specifics otherwise.

If it really contains the quote "Congress is planning a total ban of TikTok", I do consider that misleading.

People here are often making a lot of noise about disinformation campaigns on sites like Facebook and Twitter and YouTube (and that's just from user-posted content that the sites fail to moderate, not posted by the sites themselves), so I don't see why this would get a pass.

[–] Delta_V@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

There's no guarantee that making the sale will prevent the ban.

[–] shasta@lemm.ee 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Yeah but if they sell then it's someone else stuck holding the bags so why wouldn't they?

[–] Delta_V@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago

because its not in the corporation's interest to incur the expense and organizational disruption if they're still going to get banned anyway - profit is maximized by continuing with business as usual instead of spending resources attempting to reach compliance