I doubt they would if this becomes illegal.

EU laws are slow, sometimes stupid, but consistent.

sithadmin 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Are they consistent? As a North American, I find it difficult to take EU/European countries’ stances on addiction seriously when they seem to be decades behind on reducing the prevalence of smoking and drinking, which almost certainly cause more practical harm than TikTok ever could.

▲

KaiserPro 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> seem to be decades behind on reducing the prevalence of smoking and drinking,

the EU isn't a federal government. the UK, when it was in the EU did a full smoking inside ban, and tightened it after leaving.

It however had a massive problem with binge drinking and sorta didn't do much to stop that, apart from make it more expensive.

the netherlands has a smoking ban, but it was brought in later (I think). they had a different drinking culture so didn't have the same issues as the UK for drink.

That kind of issue is usually left to member states.

Packaging however is more the EU's purview

▲

ulbu 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

what is more damaging, a hammer, a sword, or poison?

i hope i don’t have to go out of my way to explain the analogy.

▲

7tflutter7 2 hours ago | parent [-]

So social media is pure 'poison' with 0 positive impact but other addictive media like video games are tools with noble utility?

The World Health Organization has reached the exact opposite conclusion.

The ICD-11 doesn't include 'social media addiction.' It doesn’t exist clinically. What they did include is 'Gaming Disorder', classifying your 'sword' alongside substance abuse and gambling.

My point is governments could just as easily justify video game crack-downs with this same logic. Is that something we should be cheering on? Really?

	▲	fifilura 18 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		It is not about that. There is surely lots of hypocrisy in particular around alcohol. In most parts of the world TBH. The discussion is whether companies are treated equally with regards to a particular law.

▲

pil0u 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism

▲

xienze 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The problem I have with the way the EU doles out these punishments is that they like to spring them on tech companies after years and years of radio silence and then suddenly it’s “hey TikTok, we just determined you’ve been breaking the law for years, pay us a couple billion please.”

Like, where were they years ago saying “hey TikTok, we think your design is addictive and probably illegal, you need to change or face penalties.” If TikTok continues to operate in the same manner despite a warning, sure, throw the book at them. Otherwise it just seems like the EU waits for years and years until a company is a big enough player and then retroactively decides they’ve been breaking the law for years. Doesn’t help the impression that they’re running a non-EU tech company shakedown campaign.

	▲	KaiserPro 4 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Its never really like this. Tiktok spend a lot of money talking to EU regulators. They know shits coming down the track because these directives have to be put into law by eu members. that takes time. > Doesn’t help the impression that they’re running a non-EU tech company shakedown campaign. But thats not the point, companies shouldn't be doing stuff they know is harmful. Thats literally the point of regulation.
	▲	AnssiH 4 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		> Like, where were they years ago saying “hey TikTok, we think your design is addictive and probably illegal, you need to change or face penalties.” That is basically what happened today. No penalties have been issued at this point. Also Commission had sent various requests for information to TikTok in 2023 before they opened these proceedings in early 2024 (https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_24_...) - this didn't come out of the blue.
	▲	7tflutter7 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		Fines on US tech companies bring in more money to the EU than the EU's entire tech industry combined.
	▲	nickslaughter02 5 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		You answered it yourself. They can't extract billions if the company is still small.
	▲	troupo 5 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		> Otherwise it just seems like the EU waits for years and years until a company is a big enough player and then retroactively decides they’ve been breaking the law for years. Lol. It's never like this. These companies are given plenty of warnings and deadlines. After years and years of ignoring them these companies get slapped with a fine and start playing the victim. BTW at this point DSA has been in effect for three years