| ▲ | yellow_lead 5 months ago |
| > The algorithm used in the US was apparently banned in China for being too addictive. Source?
I could only find this. https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/03/08/1069527/china-ti... |
|
| ▲ | afavour 5 months ago | parent | next [-] |
| > That same year, Douyin imposed a 40-minute daily limit for users under 14. Last year, Chinese regulators introduced a rule that would limit children under age 18 to two hours of smartphone screen time each day. https://abcnews.go.com/Business/tiktok-china/story?id=108111... |
| |
| ▲ | p_j_w 5 months ago | parent | next [-] | | That’s not at all the same as banning the algorithm. | | |
| ▲ | afavour 5 months ago | parent | next [-] | | It’s not the same, no. I provided the link because it’s what I assume the OP is referring to. Limiting use to 40 minutes is not a ban but it still shows a view that extended exposure to it is harmful. To turn it on its head, if more than 40 minutes is viewed harmful for Chinese youth, why not American? | | | |
| ▲ | andy_xor_andrew 5 months ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Maybe the "community notes" model isn't so bad after all | |
| ▲ | throwawayq3423 5 months ago | parent | prev [-] | | It's a clear sign the international version of TikTok, because of it's addictiveness and content, would never be allowed for a single minute in China by the people that know the most about what it is, and what is does. What more do you need to know? | | |
| ▲ | dv_dt 5 months ago | parent [-] | | If it was a legal requirement for Chinese apps in China, and this is the path for societal heath then why not pass that law for all social apps in the US? | | |
| ▲ | throwawayq3423 5 months ago | parent [-] | | Blanket content bans are the stuff of dictatorships, but restricting access to demographics that could be most harmed by it (children for example) is a good idea, and I wish the US would look into it. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | croes 5 months ago | parent | prev [-] | | That limit is independent of the used algorithm. | | |
| ▲ | actionfromafar 5 months ago | parent [-] | | How would you know? If you have only a certain time-window, you may need another kind of algorithm to retain ̶a̶d̶d̶i̶c̶t̶i̶o̶n interest day-over-day. | | |
| ▲ | croes 5 months ago | parent [-] | | I mean the limit is for all social media, the algorithm doesn’t matter. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | legitster 5 months ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| https://abcnews.go.com/Business/tiktok-china/story?id=108111... Anecdotally, I have heard from people who lived in China at the time that there was a significant shift in content a few years back. |
| |
| ▲ | cma 5 months ago | parent [-] | | The whole country had a shift though, they implemented gaming and entertainment regulations and video sites like bilibili went from $153 to a low of $8 a share. | | |
| ▲ | herval 5 months ago | parent [-] | | China didn't go after TikTok _alone_ - they reportedly went after anything deemed too addictive, including limiting the time spent on games. It was very clearly aimed towards reducing digital addiction (which is something us in the West still try to ignore as an epidemic) | | |
| ▲ | JumpCrisscross 5 months ago | parent [-] | | > China didn't go after TikTok _alone_ Because it was never there. Bytedance never launched TikTok in China. | | |
| ▲ | herval 5 months ago | parent [-] | | it's called Douyin. It's the same product, the same way a Mexican Coke is the same thing as an American Coke, and both are produced by the same company (Coca Cola). | | |
| ▲ | JumpCrisscross 5 months ago | parent | next [-] | | > it's called Douyin. It's the same product It’s a similar product. We don’t have any server-side code so we don’t know. | | |
| ▲ | herval 5 months ago | parent [-] | | did you read the rest of the sentence or | | |
| ▲ | JumpCrisscross 5 months ago | parent [-] | | The analogy to Coca Cola? Let me make another comparison: the 737 Max with one AoA sensor was made by the same company that only sold the one with two in America. |
|
| |
| ▲ | ruthmarx 5 months ago | parent | prev [-] | | Mexican Coke is different though. It doesn't use HFCS. | | |
| ▲ | cma 5 months ago | parent | next [-] | | It would be more like Coke was Mexican owned and HFCS was outlawed in Mexico. Then Mexican Coke used sugar and the Coke they exported to America used HFCS. And America said, hey, you're not consuming the same Coke you send here: we're going to ban you if you don't sell to us and our plan is to keep making HFCS Coke once we buy you. You were also hurting Pepsi (Facebook/Twitter), who also only plan on ever using HFCS. | |
| ▲ | wahnfrieden 5 months ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Yes it does. The US product called Mexican Coke doesn't, but Coke in Mexico does. | |
| ▲ | herval 5 months ago | parent | prev [-] | | Precisely. Like TikTok and Douyin. | | |
| ▲ | ruthmarx 5 months ago | parent [-] | | Except your analogy breaks as they are not the same product. | | |
| ▲ | herval 5 months ago | parent [-] | | Except they are | | |
| ▲ | ruthmarx 5 months ago | parent [-] | | No, buddy, they're not. If two products have the same name but different ingredients, they are categorically not the same product. You chose a bad analogy, that's all. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | niceice 5 months ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| The entire app is banned. They use a different one called Douyin. |
| |
| ▲ | slt2021 5 months ago | parent [-] | | I dont think tiktok app is banned because of algorithm, because bytedance created and maintains both Doyin and Tiktok. I think it is form of compartmentalizing Internet and social networks, to keep Chinese internet and social media separate from the US. the red book app, where tiktok refugees are flocking to right now, also want to introduce geofence and compartmentalize Chinese users and US users separately | | |
| ▲ | tmnvdb 5 months ago | parent | next [-] | | Tiktok is banned completely in China because it doesn't not have the agressive filtering and CPP propaganda in place to operate in China. The CPP can not allow Chineze citizens to engage in an open exchange of ideas with eachother or with the citizens of other free nations, for obvious reasons. | | |
| ▲ | skyyler 5 months ago | parent [-] | | >because it doesn't not have the agressive filtering and CPP propaganda in place to operate in China Do you believe that all Chinese media is part of a propaganda machine? Do you believe the same of American or French media? | | |
| ▲ | gkbrk 5 months ago | parent | next [-] | | You cannot operate a TV channel, a radio station or a newspaper in China without running everything through CCP first for approval. You won't find a single news report critical of the CCP because of this. Every social media app or website in China is required to ask for your real name and ID number, and implement any censorship requested by the party. If you post something that rubs the government the wrong way, your identity is readily available. I don't believe this level of content control, censorship and user prosecution is there for all American media. And if it were, you are allowed to set up your own channel or social media app in America to be the exception. | | |
| ▲ | skyyler 5 months ago | parent [-] | | >Every social media app or website in China is required to ask for your real name and ID number, and implement any censorship requested by the party. If you post something that rubs the government the wrong way, your identity is readily available. I didn't know this. Do you have any reading on the subject you can recommend? | | |
| |
| ▲ | 5 months ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | grahamj 5 months ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Yes. No. (Although that No is getting a bit blurry with US social media bending over for commander cheeto) | |
| ▲ | tmnvdb 5 months ago | parent | prev [-] | | Yes.
No. |
|
| |
| ▲ | eleveriven 5 months ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | It’s not just about controlling content but also about controlling how users interact across borders | |
| ▲ | throwawayq3423 5 months ago | parent | prev [-] | | You are making a distinction without a difference. China knows TikTok is harmful, which is why it allows it's export and bans domestic consumption. Think of it like a drug. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | HenryBemis 5 months ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| https://www.deseret.com/2022/11/24/23467181/difference-betwe... "It’s almost like they recognize that technology is influencing kids’ development, and they make their domestic version a spinach version of TikTok, while they ship the opium version to the rest of the world,” |
|
| ▲ | the_clarence 5 months ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| His comment is obvious propaganda |
|
| ▲ | vFunct 5 months ago | parent | prev [-] |
| [flagged] |
| |
| ▲ | JumpCrisscross 5 months ago | parent | next [-] | | > The actual senators that created the ban I worked on some language in the bill for my Senator. The unifying concern—and my and their concern—was China. I know when you have a pet war you tend to see everything through its lens, but most Americans—including electeds—couldn’t care less about what’s going on in Gaza or Ukraine. | | |
| ▲ | donbateman 5 months ago | parent | next [-] | | [flagged] | |
| ▲ | vFunct 5 months ago | parent | prev [-] | | That’s not now policy works in the US. We aren’t a direct democracy. Policy proposals don’t require “most Americans” to care about it. It only requires most LEGISLATORS to care. And legislators have zero requirement to explain to the public the real reason a policy proposal happens. The language used in a bill doesn’t have to be the reason it exists. This is how lobbying works. I get that people have pet issues they want to protect, but Israel was a big enough reason to force Joe Biden out of office: https://www.imeupolicyproject.org/postelection-polling | | |
| ▲ | JumpCrisscross 5 months ago | parent [-] | | > Israel was a big enough reason to force Joe Biden out of office Wow, people really believe Joe Biden wouldn’t have bombed his debate if he just changed his policy on Israel. (Or more seriously, that Kamala was kept out of the White House by this. What a myopic worldview.) | | |
| ▲ | vFunct 5 months ago | parent [-] | | Yes, people believe that, because that’s what scientific polling states. Wow. You may not agree with the 10% of the population that sides with Hamas, but that’s enough to cause an election to flip from Democrat to Republican or Independent, causing a 1.5% win for Trump. The world doesn’t operate in majorities. Small groups do have power over you. | | |
| ▲ | JumpCrisscross 5 months ago | parent [-] | | > that’s what scientific polling states What poll? Every reputable pollster said the opposite. > You may not agree with the 10% of the population that sides with Hamas, but that’s enough to cause an election to flip I don’t and it’s not because of where they are. State-level polls on the issue show it’s irrelevant. That’s why it was ignored. The fact that people were willing to throw the election on this single issue certainly changed my view on the matter, and I know two Republican Senators who took it as a license to be more aggressive against Palestine and Iran. | | |
| ▲ | vFunct 5 months ago | parent [-] | | All the reputable pollsters agree with me, including probably THE best pollster: YouGov See: https://amp.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/national/artic... If you don’t want to believe reputable pollsters you can look at state primary polling results. For those, the uncommitted movement received 9% of the votes in the Democratic primaries. And Kamala lost by 1.5% in the general election. You can thank us in making sure your candidate was defeated. Maybe next time don’t live stream Jews killing thousands of Muslim children on Instagram with the support of your candidate while pretending it doesn’t matter? lol you really thought Gaza didn’t matter in the election? Even I don’t believe you believe that. Be serious. |
|
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | iaseiadit 5 months ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | They’re talking about the algorithm that’s used outside of China being banned in China, not TikTok being banned in the US. | |
| ▲ | whateveracct 5 months ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > Israel is why we can’t have nice things in America. I wouldn't say TikTok is a "nice thing" .. | |
| ▲ | bushbaba 5 months ago | parent | prev [-] | | This is a conspiracy theory. The banning of TikTok was discussed prior to the Hamas Israel war. | | |
| ▲ | vFunct 5 months ago | parent [-] | | The actual senators that wrote the legislation publicly stated TikTok was banned because of Israel. I get that Zionists don’t want that reason stated publicly, hoping to blame China instead, but it’s out there now. | | |
| ▲ | bushbaba 5 months ago | parent [-] | | Congress voted on the bill, and congress did not vote yes for Israel, but US interests if a war with China were to start. |
|
|
|
