They are in transition, so for the moment I believe them to have technical problems, because it also matches my experience. Yesterday I encountered problems with several videos, which are working today. And not all of them were political.

Going by the comments, people on TikTok seem very fast in seeing conspiracies, when many problems can be simply explained with normal problems or human failings. And it's good to be critical and aware of dangers, but I fear if they are so easy to call out problems, it will wear of fast, and people will start to ignore real problems again, like they used to be.

▲

biophysboy 7 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I am also skeptical (despite having 0 faith in the new owners). However, I am a bit confused: why would new ownership alone cause technical issues? It seems like they set new requirements that required new software. Even if the reqs are content-agnostic, I am curious what they are and how they differ from the previous tiktok.

▲

mvdtnz 5 hours ago | parent [-]

Data migrations, new staff permissions and policies, merging AWS or other cloud accounts and their complex IAM policies, enrolling devices into new corporate networks, Okta setup, corporate firewalls. There are hundreds of reasons that moving to a new corporate ownership can cause technical problems.

▲

biophysboy 4 hours ago | parent [-]

which of these do you think is most likely? I thought they were already using usa-based cloud infrastructure

	▲	mvdtnz 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		All of these will be happening as well as hundreds of other moving pieces (domain name transfers, DNS changes, adjusting compute resources to maximise existing contracts with providers, migrating metrics systems impacting alerts and infra scaling etc etc etc). It's impossible to say from the outside which of these are causing issues. > I thought they were already using usa-based cloud infrastructure Unless they were already using the same provider on the same account with the same IAM policies as their new owner (they were not, obviously) this is irrelevant.

▲

HelloMcFly 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The presumption of good faith has been justifiably obliterated when it comes to Topics Such As These with our right-wing extremist political and media leadership.

▲

PurpleRamen 9 hours ago | parent [-]

Especially with extremists, you should have a solid foundation of argumentation, because they will not ignore even little fails and weaponize everything against you if necessary.

▲

HelloMcFly 9 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Especially with extremists, a solid foundation of argumentation will do you no good because the facts are beside the point.

	▲	PurpleRamen 8 hours ago \| parent [-]
		It's not about the extremists, it's about everyone else. Extremists usually have to convince people to give them power, to follow their BS. And by experience, even extremists sometimes can change their mind.

▲

ImPostingOnHN 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It's unnecessary: extremists usually aren't seeking to change their mind, and they'd sooner fabricate evidence of a fail than acknowledge The Perfect Argument That Totally Changed My Mind

▲

whatwhaaaaat 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Just technical problems in their “banned topic” identification models. No need to be concerned.

	▲	PurpleRamen 9 hours ago \| parent [-]
		The point is that people are more aware of problems happening with that topic, but ignore whether it also happens with other topics. So at the moment it's a very skewed view.