| ▲ | stonesthrowaway 13 hours ago |
| > TikTok is perhaps the most impressively addictive social media app ever created. What nonsense. > The algorithm used in the US was apparently banned in China for being too addictive. "Apparently"? Tiktok was forced to separate itself into a chinese version and the non-chinese version by the US because we didn't want "da ccp" controlling tiktok. > There's a certain historic symmetry with how opium was traditionally used in China, then Britain introduced stronger, more disruptive versions, forcing a stronger social reaction. There is no historic symmetry. Unless china invades the US and forces americans to use tiktok. Like britain invaded china ( opium wars ) and forced opium on china's population. What's with all the same propaganda in every tiktok/china related thread? The same talking points on every single thread for the past few years. |
|
| ▲ | tmnvdb 13 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| "Tiktok was forced to separate itself into a chinese version and the non-chinese version by the US because we didn't want "da ccp" controlling tiktok." You're talking about Propaganda but you are spreading straight up fake news. ByteDance initially released Douyin in China in September 2016.
ByteDance introduced TikTok for users outside of China in 2017. There was no "split", let alone one "forced by the US". |
| |
| ▲ | stonesthrowaway 12 hours ago | parent [-] | | > There was no "split", let alone one "forced by the US". There was no split? You wrote: "ByteDance initially released Douyin in China in September 2016. ByteDance introduced TikTok for users outside of China in 2017." You say there was no split while explicitly proving that there was split? You're not that stupid are you? Why do you think "tiktok" was created in 2017 when bytedance already had douyin( aka tiktok ) in 2016? Why is there a "tiktok" for china and a "tiktok" for everyone else? Because the "tiktok in china ( duoyin ) was influenced by the chinese government and to appease the US, bytedance branched off tiktok from "douyin". | | |
| ▲ | tmnvdb 12 hours ago | parent [-] | | I doesn't have anything to do with "appeasing" the US, the Chinese version is heavily filtered and tilted towards CPP prefered activities and worldview, such a platform would never work on the international market and they know it. And it obviously is not a split if they are seperate apps from the beginning. Why do you lie so much btw? | | |
| ▲ | stonesthrowaway 12 hours ago | parent [-] | | > I doesn't have anything to do with "appeasing" the US No. It had everything to do with it. How can you say that when tiktok is getting banned? Even after bytedance bent over backwards to appease the US? > the Chinese version is heavily filtered and tilted towards CPP prefered activities and worldview, such a platform would never work on the international market and they know it. Sure. But nothing prevents tiktok from catering their app to other nations differently. You do realize that most nations get different versions of tiktok, facebook, youtube, etc right? > And it obviously is not a split if they are seperate apps from the beginning. But they weren't separate apps from the beginning. Your fellow bot/propagandists wrote: "ByteDance initially released Douyin in China in September 2016. ByteDance introduced TikTok for users outside of China in 2017." If someone is born in 2016 and another person is born in 2017 are born in the same year? Are they the same person? > Why do you lie so much btw? Everyone can read this thread and see that you are lying. Not me. | | |
| ▲ | tmnvdb 12 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > “You do realize that most nations get different versions of TikTok, Facebook, YouTube, etc., right?” That statement is misleading, as the differences between these platforms across various countries are typically minor—mostly due to copyright restrictions—so users can still access roughly 99% of the same content. This situation isn’t remotely comparable to TikTok’s China-only counterpart, Douyin, which exists in a separate and completely different ecosystem. I suspect you’re aware of this, yet you brought it up anyway. What is your motivation for such dishonesty? > “No. It had everything to do with it. How can you say that when TikTok is getting banned? Even after ByteDance bent over backward to appease the US?” Could you explain exactly what the United States did before 2017 that caused ByteDance to launch a separate app for every country outside of China (not just in the US)? You seem to be muddying the waters by referring to this potential 2024 ban, but that obviously can’t be the reason ByteDance created a separate platform for every non-China country back in 2017. > “But they weren’t separate apps from the beginning.” Actually, they were. Douyin is geo-restricted to China (requiring a Chinese phone number to register) and was never accessible to users outside the country. This restriction was put in place to limit the information available to Chinese users, clearly separating Douyin from TikTok right from the start. > "Everyone can read this thread and see that you are lying. Not me." Well, I certainly agree that everyone can read this thread and make a judgement on who is more honest. | |
| ▲ | leptons 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Stepping into this pile of.... > Even after bytedance bent over backwards to appease the US? In 2017 when TikTok was launched, there were no US government rules towards it, there were no demands made by the US government about TikTok - that part is the absolutely wrong part of your argument. You either didn't know that, or you are lying about it. Either way it's misinformation. ByteDance didn't do anything to appease the US in 2016 or 2017. Bytedance offering Douyin for China, and a separate app TikTok for other markets is specifically about controlling the content that people see in China. TikTok is banned in China because content on TikTok isn't as filtered and strictly controlled in the same ways that China's government wants it to be for their own people - TikTok was specifically made for markets outside of China for this reason. The US had NOTHING to do with that, it is strictly about China controlling China's population with Douyin, or more specifically, not losing control of Chinese people by allowing anti-China videos to appear in Douyin. It's far easier for China to control the narrative they want if there are two separate apps that essentially provide the same user experience. The Chinese government controls TikTok, and I have not seen a single anti-China video in my wife's TikTok feed, so I'm willing to believe that they do have some control over content in the US too. I hope that's not too complicated for you to understand. >> Why do you lie so much btw? >Everyone can read this thread and see that you are lying. Not me. The other person is not lying. You may not be lying, but you really don't have your facts straight. |
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | JumpCrisscross 13 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > Tiktok was forced to separate itself into a chinese version and the non-chinese version by the US because we didn't want "da ccp" controlling tiktok No. TikTok was forced to put its data on American servers [1]. Douyin was launched in 2016 as musical.ly, and is unrelated to U.S. pressure. (EDIT: Douyin was launched in 2016, TikTok in 2017. Musical.ly was acquired in 2017 and merged into/basically became TikTok. TikTok has never been in China.) [1] https://www.reuters.com/technology/tiktok-moves-us-user-data... |
| |
| ▲ | sureglymop 13 hours ago | parent [-] | | Musical.ly was not China only and I knew musical.ly before it was the predecessor of tiktok. From how I recall it, it had mostly American users. Was the split during the rebranding? | | |
|
|
| ▲ | hombre_fatal 13 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| What viewpoint is your use of “da ccp” supposed to disparage? |
| |
| ▲ | whateveracct 12 hours ago | parent [-] | | I think people (Americans) who view China as a geopolitical rival/enemy of the United States? |
|
|
| ▲ | johnmaguire 13 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > > TikTok is perhaps the most impressively addictive social media app ever created. > What nonsense. Obviously experiences will vary, but I think this is actually pretty well-established. Not many studies, but here's one: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9486470/ |
|
| ▲ | herval 13 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| how did Britain force the Chinese population to consume Opium? |
| |
| ▲ | se4u 13 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I don't know if you are just ignorant about history and unwilling to Google, or if you are making the point that of course British did not force feed opium to the people. What is very well established is that the british fought a war , literally called the opium war by Western historians themselves with the main objective of keeping their opium distribution into China open after the emperor banned it Their action was akin to if some majority owner of Purdue pharma invades US and forces US government to "keep the oxy market open" while letting "people make their own decision". | | |
| ▲ | talldatethrow 12 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Tbh, what you describe sounds nothing like forcing opium on a people.
If mexico invaded and started making meth in the US, or started sending even more meth into the US than they do now by totally taking over the border, I would not begin taking meth. | | | |
| ▲ | 12 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [deleted] |
| |
| ▲ | adolph 12 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | >> Like britain invaded china ( opium wars ) and forced opium on china's population.
> how did Britain force the Chinese population to consume Opium?
The Chinese government of the time had banned opium and the British worked to bypass that, eventually with governmental force. | | |
| ▲ | herval 12 hours ago | parent [-] | | I'm not saying Britain didn't do something _against the will of the goverment_. I'm just questioning OP's nonsense that individuals were forced to consume Opium vs not forced to consume TikTok - in both cases, clearly nobody was forced. And in both cases, it's products made to be addictive. |
|
|
