Just because it doesn’t say “ban” doesn’t mean its not one. It is well known that China lists algorithms and AI models trained on citizen data as a non-export so tiktok will never be able to sell to anyone other than a Chinese company unless they retrain the model etc.
The CEO has mentioned that they will simply pull out of the US market.
Theoretically they could sell "TikTok" to a US company who then licenses algorithm processing to the Chinese entity, no?
The US entity isn't beholden to the CCP and can decide to switch algorithm providers if they suddenly notice it's getting very propaganda-y, which provides a degree of independent oversight appeasing US concerns while not necessitating actually switching from the current systems.
The law requires the President (i.e. executive agencies) to verify any such transaction, and it specifically calls out "cooperation with respect to the operation of a content recommendation algorithm or an agreement with respect to data sharing" as subject to review. So they thought about that.
I am baffled that any thoughtful person would take a CEO statement at face value without considering incentives.
1) prior to bill passage, convincing the public that they will pull out is optimal as it helps argue against bill, regardless of whether it is at all true
2) but, after bill passage, the incentives are totally different. Pulling out means giving up a billion dollar market that could instead have been sold. The shareholders would be livid.
So I am very skeptical. I have heard CEOs say many things they later were found to clearly never have meant seriously, simply because it was what they needed to say at the time. Like, "we would never do outsourcing or layoffs, your division is totally safe"....
I would think thoughtful HN readers would be just a little less credulous
That does not follow at all. Perhaps they simply don't want to spin off a future competitor, and decide that selling simply isn't worth that future risk.
That would be delusional, since TikTok's success is due to first-mover advantage due to network effects, not any hard to replicate technology or other real moat. They can imagine otherwise but that is just stroking their own egos.
They were the first popular short-form algorithmic addictive feed app. Anyone can make one now (YT Shorts, Insta Reels, etc), there's no secret sauce anymore like there may have been years ago. But TikTok stays number one because they were number one -- network effects.
If they disappear, a new competitor takes over and is just as strong as they were. All the value is in the niche, not the occupant of the niche. It really would be like they're giving it away instead of at least collecting a few billion cash for it. It would be monumentally stupid. They'd get the future competitor just as much whether they sell or not.
They could work on a "good enough" algorithm that is basically already in public/open source domain when they sell it. 80% of its value is captive audience and "cool factor" with younger users.
As I understand TikTok has been investing in building out a U.S. fulfillment center network over the past two years, perhaps a drop in the bucket for them. With this investment and the loads of U.S employees they have I would be surprised if they leave their large (largest?) user base.
This they can actually sell, plenty of fulfillment companies that would be interested in buying. They aren't selling their tech though and I don't blame them, Facebook wouldn't sell to be in China so whatever. However, I am disappointed because we aren't China and shouldn't govern the same. I personally will be voting for any non incumbent going forward (for my remaining time in this country, I'm getting out of here), the current legislature on both sides is insane, dangerous and (obviously) slowly creeping up the road of fascism.
There's a great book that I think everyone should read:
"On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century" by Tim Snyder, it's also is short and to the point (audiobook is 2 hours long) and teaches people what to look for to see when their country slides into authoritarianism and what to do to fight it.
The author also reads it on YouTube if you can't get a hold of it.
Of course the CEO is going to say that, because they don't want the law passed. When the chips are down, it's a lot less likely that just pull out than that they take the money from one of the many salivating buyers.
If TikTok is in bed with the CCP as much as Congress says they are, think about the actual cause and effect of their different options.
If ByteDance sells TikTok to US owners to satisfy the requirement, they give up control of a successful platform developed inside of China to a self-declared adversary that already controls most of the world's social media platforms, representing a significant loss to China as they attempt to compete online.
If ByteDance ignores the demand to sell, the US government has obligated itself to prevent its citizens from accessing one of the most popular social media apps in existence, something that the affected users will be extremely angry about, and will likely make claims of state censorship.
If I were China, and my goal was to leverage TikTok to do harm to America, I would choose the option that turns US citizens against the government over the option that transfers power from China to the US.
aren't they already split and use different app in China vs US. Interestingly Chinese app's algorithm chooses more STEM videos, while Western version just pushes addictive crap.
China is a communist country. State owned industry. The leash they give business "owners" might be long (long enough to fool westerns it's just another USA), but it is still a leash, and they are still under control of the party. No courts, no rights, no lawsuits. Party wants, party takes.
There are plenty of US companies that are authorized to use government-funded patents, that would prevent them from transferring ownership to foreign owners. This isn't a "poison pill" conspiracy, this is standard export control for state-funded technology.
Companies that are export controlled have military tech. The idea that a social media app would have a poison pill for export control is ridiculous and shows how owned these supposedly independent companies really are.
ITAR applies to many technologies that are trivial to duplicate or have been redeveloped outside the US to bypass those restrictions. Memory chips hardened for space are subject to ITAR. These memory chips are commercial with lead tape on them.
> they also have to remove the addiction algorithm
Whoever they sell it to, if they end up doing that, is going to be more than willing to put in place their own addiction algorithm, in just the same way that American social media and other adjacent tech companies have implemented them.
I'm in no way a fan or user of TikTok, but thinking this will improve the app seems naive.
Having the US's primary rival, which runs massive disinformation campaigns, also opaquely control the content that US youth consume en masse seems worse than...just about any alternative.
Someone like Facebook wants the algorithm to show addictive content that generally isn't super offensive to the average person. Someone like the CCP wants the algorithm to show addictive content that idealizes "socialism with Chinese characteristics" and increases division in Western countries.
It doesn’t sound like you’ve ever used TikTok. I assumed the same thing going in and found quite the opposite. I’m way better informed since I started using it. In some cases by people that were actually involved in whatever event was newsworthy.
Selectively reducing or excluding some events as not newsworthy while promoting others is observable when using ticktock and the underlying means of propaganda people are concerned about.
For a US example you can simply count the minutes of coverage Fox News and CNN give to various stories for the same basic effect. How much coverage you gives the Russia- Ukraine war can be just as impactful as if you refer to it as a Russian invasion or not.
I don't use TikTok, but I use Facebook and Google's short video versions. I find just as many anti-CCP as pro-CCP content on it, and...I guess these are mostly TikTok videos because many of them still have TikTok watermarks.
Have you even used TikTok?
Facebook connects you with the people around you, and TikTok connects you with your favorite people on earth. That's the essence of the product.
I've found way more false news and stuff on TikTok than anywhere else, even about innocuous things and not something serious like a war. It's taken on the form of modern day chain mails in the way it spreads lies, with the participants being the most invested. They all think they're doing citizen journalism yet most of them verify nothing.
Let me not even get started on the deep fakes lurking on the platform.
Not only is there more false info on Tiktok, the user comes away with high certainty they are being reliably informed. Because accounts popular on Tiktok focus strictly on presentation and entertainment, not anything actual journalists prioritize.
The effect is less informed with higher certainty, and terrible combination for training citizens for actual civil discourse.
I don't see how people can say this with a straight face knowing that American adversaries operate almost in the open on Facebook. You don't need to control the platform to control the message. That's what social media companies sell!
I don't think the GP was talking about ads at all when referring to foreign adversaries influence on Facebook. They wouldn't need ads. They're doing fine disseminating disinformation already. TikTok does not promote CCP messages through ads, either.
If it has to come down to companies increasing division in Western countries for profit over ideology, then fine. One is a negative externality that can be mitigated, the other is the entire point (therefore cannot be made better).
But you need to control the platform to siphon user data , have a foothold into everyone's phone and to peddle misinformation and entertainment instead of education (Chinese version operates differently than the non-Chinese one).
There is no greater vehicle to deliver a hooking mechanism to target specific users for spyware upload than an app that is installed on a lot of platforms.
Weechat is one other such tool btw. and that thing behaves strangely compared to e.g. Whatsapp if you install it.
While this AFAIK only applies to the US, it should be the #1 issue to solve. By a wide margin. It's honestly baffling that not everyone with half a brain is up in arms about it.
I'm not convinced anything on TikTok is more divisive than any other social media platform. And Reddit seems to be filled with a lot more tankies than other platforms.
> idealizes "socialism with Chinese characteristics" and increases division in Western countries.
You're right, everyone I know now buys their glycine from Donghua Jinlong instead of using domestic manufacturers. This is clearly not because of the superior manufacturing capabilities of Donghua Jinlong, who are ISO9001 and ISO14001 certified, and whose glycine is industrial AND food grade, but because of an insidious campaign by the CCP to promote Chinese glycine across the entire industry, trying to crush American glycine manufacturing. I demand congressional hearings about what our elected politicians are doing about this threat to American-made glycine!
On a serious note, it's so amusing to me to read the comments of people who hate TikTok, but who clearly haven't used it. They simply have no idea what it looks like and the kind of content that is popular on it.
But they're very certain that it's bad!
Meanwhile, I'm scratching my head trying to understand how my watch history could have any value whatsoever. Cute kittens, shirtless guys chopping wood, sad hamster memes, Sanchez the sleepy racoon, Young Royals edits, some dude eating all kinds of cheese, A bunch of confused Americans in Europe and vice versa, PEDRO PEDRO PEDRO, guys promoting their onlyfans, schwapeepee, and of course Donghua Jinlong content, although it seems to have run its course now.
> Having the US's primary rival, which runs massive disinformation campaigns, also opaquely control the content that US youth consume en masse seems worse than...just about any alternative
How is it worse than making disseminating disinformation illegal? The law as written lays bare the true motivation - it's not about fighting disinformation ("inauthentic user activity" has been detected across all social networks for the purposes of disinformation). It almost certainly is about protecting American companies from competitors with better AI algorithms. The legislature has telegraphed that the tech/potential for abuse are not problems by themselves - ownership by a Chinese company is what they take issue with.
But why is that a bad thing, China has the same regulations on companies not Chinese? Its not "better" algorithms its "weaponized" algorithms designed for specific populations including its own population which I imagine are not as damaging then the ones applied to others. My point is, of course this will be banned if the US gov cannot benefit from it and considered a threat to certain people.
I didn't say it was a bad thing - I said there's a better option that wasn't taken. IMO, protecting citizens from bad behavior by domestic and foreign companies is nobler than corporate protectionism. YMMV .
>Having the US's primary rival, which runs massive disinformation campaigns, also opaquely control the content that US youth consume en masse seems worse than...just about any alternative.
Sounds like a skill issue. The Us has decades worth of a head start on the internet and social media. If "the enemy" can just waltz in and disrupt that in a matter of 5 years, I think we have bigger issues on hand.
> Someone like the CCP wants the algorithm to show addictive content that idealizes "socialism with Chinese characteristics" and increases division in Western countries.
Yeah, America has a decade long headstart on that too. We blamed facebook in 2016, we're blaming Tiktok in 2024. How long are we going to deflect this to the internet?
> “socialism with Chinese characteristics" and increases division in Western countries
Do you have a single example of a successful Chinese media campaign, disinformation or information - just one?
Because I can name, off the top of my head, disinformation campaigns by Trump (election was stole) , by Israel (bunker under a hospital), by Isis (mass recruitment in western countries), by oil companies (heat pumps don’t work in Britain’s unique climate), by food companies, by Russia, by Greenpeace, by crazy people on 4chan but I cannot name a single message that came out of China and got major public resonance in the west.
CCP is a major pusher of disinformation/propaganda. Look up Dragonbridge. Or how YouTube had to remove thousands of CCP propaganda channels. Or the classic "US Army Covid Origin" story that China pushed when social media came for Wuhan.
China's 50-cent army buys social media accounts, or creates fake personas, to push narratives and abuses reporting/takedown mechanisms to suppress unfavorable posts and channels.
A Facebook or Twitter-esque addiction algorithm is WAY better than a CCP addiction algorithm since the latter tries to socially engineer unrest and disillusion, on purpose, as a targeted act of Nakatomi-esque cyberwarfare against a totalitarian regime's rivals. The former kind maybe does so as an inadvertent externality, and with every reason to wager to a far lesser degree.
Meta won't turn up the heat on antisemitism and down on something the CCP doesn't like. It might turn up the heat on, I don't know, trans rights, and down on neo Nazis, but it's much more benign dystopic info filtering than an actual "what will destabilize the US and fuel stochastic terrorism and civil war?" agenda (which is against Meta's best interest).
The US social media seems to be encouraging nationalism and conservatism. Which Im also not to happy about. It seems to be creating more unrest in the west rather than strength progress and unity.
China might not even need to influence the west through tiktok, meta and friends seem to be doing plenty of it themselves. None of it seem to be making us progress forward tbh
I give TikTok negative benefit of the doubt though. Nobody can prove if the stream of craziness is organic or a result of Chinese propagandists tuning the algorithm, but I'll believe it's the latter every time. Could I even afford not to? It's just game theory at this point.
> None of it seem to be making us progress forward tbh
The Nirvana Fallacy is when you reject the better of two outcomes because it's not good enough compared to some mythical optimum.
In this case, the optimum could be some social media service that "strengthens progress and unity" or it could be a total ban on social media altogether, both of which seem pretty mythical. :p
I believe organic, chaotic derangement is better than extrinsic, targeted derangement in magnitude and outcome.
Not sure why you're getting downvoted - but I think this is thoughtful and to the point.
The highest ideal American SNS follow is profit. That will generate all kinds of externalities that might be bad for society. Still, at least so far, we've found it to be the least destructive optimization target in modern human history (vs. socialism).
The CCP is clearly tuning the algorithm in the SNS under its control to limit topics it deems undesirable in its goal of an ideal society. Whoever thinks this isn't so bad hasn't experienced an authoritarian state personally or at least highly underestimates the pain and suffering one can inflict.
I'm looking forward to more regulation of social media to be honest... All of the algorithms only end up working against the entertainment and educational factor of it all anyway. I'm thoroughly convinced that the social media mega-platforms have all moved out of algorithms to just pushing sponsored ads all day. Many of these ads repeat far too often every time I log in, and it's been making me want to ban all the apps anyway...
> I'm looking forward to more regulation of social media to be honest
I'm afraid that's not goign to happen in the US. Politicians never let a disaster go to waste: had the will been there to regulate social media in general, the hysteria around TikTok would have precipitated it. Instead, we got a law specifically targeting TikTok and ignoring other SM.
Facebook & Instagram have had tons of Congressional scrutiny over the past decade, the problem is they never really did much to fix issues with the platform as a result.
The mere fact that these social media CEOs are building vast bunkers and amassing billions of dollars highlights the issue that they are literally shoveling value out of these platforms into their own pockets, and those of their investors, while preying upon the instincts of all their users in a deeply psychological manner.
I just don't we'll ever see bans of social media working in the USA if the company is from here, at least not for the next 15 years, SCOTUS will most likely shoot down any attempts to do any serious regulation of social media except for maybe people under 18.
Personal web sites have been around for ages. Things worked better before when there was a proper search related to individual web sites and music blogs. There was also a lot less obsession with minute-to-minute updates from artists and scams to get on playlists and for likes and followers.
I'm a musician myself, and social media is totally overburdening the music economy with scams for musicians like paying for ads and bot services just to get visibility. Social Media overall is considered to be a wasteland dedicated to promoting only artificially engineered celebrity music and stories right now in the opinion of many.
You're right, but to the consumer like me I cherish how I'm able to connect to my favorite individuals like Andrej Karpathy and still learn a lot. I guess most people are likely the same, and spend an awful amount of time daily on this, whether they know it or not.
Playing devil's advocate: you can't block on native apps, and some mobile web browsers don't have extension support.
Also, please avoid ad-hominem ("hilariously limited intellect"); it overshadows what otherwise would be a valid point (enforcing a ban vs. practicing personal habit, critique on blanket statements, etc.)
Google and Meta already have plenty of TikTok-style videos with addictive algorithms, so I don't think we will be much better off if TikTok leaves the market. Kids will just migrate to other competitors.
The algorithm's novelty and recommendation accuracy is so far beyond what other competitors like Google, Snapchat, and Meta have that this seems like a coordinated effort by the private sector to push forth their mediocre products and centralize social media service which I absolutely DETEST. Mark Zuckerberg has publicly announced how far behind Tiktok Meta was. Many years later they are still playing catchup.
Though, the saddest thing is that it seems like the U.S citizens, (i.e ANY of tiktoks 160 MILLION US users) have absolutely no say in the operations,a yet we actually interact with the app not these old people in Congress. The fact that Biden so swiftly signed the bill too makes me frustrated as I want to vote for him, but he keeps doing or okaying things that are counter to my values.
Yeah. Google won this war already by getting Chromebooks into schools, which are mandatorily tied to a Gsuite account and thus have YouTube Shorts, drive, Gmail, etc access.
As a parent, I hate google a lot more than TikTok. I can already block TikTok, but I can't block youtube because the school district mandates it.
They don't need chromebooks in schools, my kid uses YouTube kids at home (that doesn't include shorts), teens will have their own phone usually, and youtube is already a popular place for them to go, discovering YouTube shorts (if they haven't already), is easy.
But ya, if a teen is otherwise cut off from devices besides the ones they get from school, then you could see that as a weak point, although I don't think that applies to a significant portion of families. For the ones that it does apply to, they probably have bigger problems to worry about than TikTok being banned.
The admins should be able to block YouTube for minors when asked. There's a way to do it but it's by OU not individual user. Fight for it if you want it.
The CEO has mentioned that they will simply pull out of the US market.