ByteDance plans TikTok IPO to win U.S. deal as deadline looms(reuters.com)
reuters.com
ByteDance plans TikTok IPO to win U.S. deal as deadline looms
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-tiktok-china/bytedance-plans-tiktok-ipo-to-win-u-s-deal-as-deadline-looms-sources-idUSKBN2682NL
117 comments
Does anyone think this plan actually works for the US Government?
Depends on what you mean, there are a lot of ways to look at this.
If somehow they do get the apps banned from app stores... I suspect that would constitute a fairly large chunk of the US cut off from tiktok.
On the other hand if you look at it from the POTUS's POV where just saying your doing stuff means you can claim victory... he might feel he already won.
If somehow they do get the apps banned from app stores... I suspect that would constitute a fairly large chunk of the US cut off from tiktok.
On the other hand if you look at it from the POTUS's POV where just saying your doing stuff means you can claim victory... he might feel he already won.
There is only one way to look at this, and that’s what it is. It’s the president and his administration searching for any route to re-election and thus abusing any power he has towards that goal. It could also be collusion in which Trump is trying to personally profit or have supporters profit.
The security angle is theater. Many American corporations gather and abuse much more data than any allegations against TikTok and WeChat. And if people are really worried about foreign monitoring, then there are millions of cameras and microphones embedded in baby monitors, pet feeders, home security cameras, and other smart devices, all foreign made and networked. Some claims of influence could be made in TikTok, but there’s literally nothing stopping that from happening on platforms owned by U.S. companies, where it’s been proven to have happened and is still currently happening. So that argument doesn’t apply. If it does apply, it applies to a much broader app landscape than just TikTok and WeChat.
So in the end, everyone debating this thing as if it is an actual intelligent thing to be discussed is just adding legitimacy to Trump grasping for re-election and another one of his chaotic moves. There are actual problems but those are only plastered onto this whole deal by externals. The president literally tried to treat this thing as if it was an episode of The Apprentice, demanding payment from the sale. It’s ludicrous.
This is exactly what Adam Curtis means by Hypernormalization.
The security angle is theater. Many American corporations gather and abuse much more data than any allegations against TikTok and WeChat. And if people are really worried about foreign monitoring, then there are millions of cameras and microphones embedded in baby monitors, pet feeders, home security cameras, and other smart devices, all foreign made and networked. Some claims of influence could be made in TikTok, but there’s literally nothing stopping that from happening on platforms owned by U.S. companies, where it’s been proven to have happened and is still currently happening. So that argument doesn’t apply. If it does apply, it applies to a much broader app landscape than just TikTok and WeChat.
So in the end, everyone debating this thing as if it is an actual intelligent thing to be discussed is just adding legitimacy to Trump grasping for re-election and another one of his chaotic moves. There are actual problems but those are only plastered onto this whole deal by externals. The president literally tried to treat this thing as if it was an episode of The Apprentice, demanding payment from the sale. It’s ludicrous.
This is exactly what Adam Curtis means by Hypernormalization.
How exactly does this move help him win reelection? I'm genuinely curious, I just don't see how this action would move anyone into a Trump vote who was previously not already planning to vote Trump.
No one said it is an intelligent move. Just because it is a move doesn’t necessarily make it a good one. Trump is, hopefully, grasping for straws. He has tried to use the virus and now trade to tie into hate brooding in the country and use anti-Chinese sentiment to his advantage. Trump has specifically attacked Biden as being soft on China. It’s all a ploy, just like his shenanigans on the U.S. treasury being sent a cut of the sale of TikTok. The fact that there are legitimate issues external but related to Trump’s actions and proclamations does not legitimize them.
I think it’s dangerous because people are underestimating just how hateful a lot of the U.S. is against foreigners and how whatever Trump is anti at the moment spreads like wildfire. Americans in general do not understand China or even how similar our government can be, and so it is easy to rally people against it.
I think it’s dangerous because people are underestimating just how hateful a lot of the U.S. is against foreigners and how whatever Trump is anti at the moment spreads like wildfire. Americans in general do not understand China or even how similar our government can be, and so it is easy to rally people against it.
> Many American corporations gather and abuse much more data than any allegations against TikTok and WeChat.
You're inventing a false premise with that setup. The issue with TikTok isn't primarily data collection unto itself. It's that they're owned by China (ie who is doing the data collecting), and without exception all large corporations in China are directly commanded by the CCP. They have CCP committees that 'advise' the boards and outline what the companies may or may not do at all times; primarily focused on major decisions, sensitive matters for the CCP, or matters of national strategy. The only reason ByteDance isn't selling TikTok for example, is because the CCP said they weren't allowed to because it would make China look weak; that's not a decision that is up to ByteDance, because they're not in control of anything ultimately. In China's dictatorship, all power by default rests with the CCP (and increasingly with future Chairman Xi's new cult of personality, as the purges have begun); that approach means they can do anything at any time for any reason.
They even started hijacking boards in Hong Kong back in 2016:
WSJ 2017: "Since 2016, at least 32 Chinese state-owned companies or units listed in Hong Kong have proposed changes to their corporate structures to install Communist Party committees that advise their boards of directors." [1]
China isn't an ally of the US, they're a blend of enemy and super competitor. They don't freely allow US companies - such as Facebook, Google, Reddit, Twitter, Snapchat, Pinterest, Amazon AWS, and dozens of others - to operate inside of China. It's entirely reasonable to disallow some China-owned corporations from operating in the US as a matter of trade reciprocation.
[1] https://www.wsj.com/articles/now-advising-chinas-state-firms...
You're inventing a false premise with that setup. The issue with TikTok isn't primarily data collection unto itself. It's that they're owned by China (ie who is doing the data collecting), and without exception all large corporations in China are directly commanded by the CCP. They have CCP committees that 'advise' the boards and outline what the companies may or may not do at all times; primarily focused on major decisions, sensitive matters for the CCP, or matters of national strategy. The only reason ByteDance isn't selling TikTok for example, is because the CCP said they weren't allowed to because it would make China look weak; that's not a decision that is up to ByteDance, because they're not in control of anything ultimately. In China's dictatorship, all power by default rests with the CCP (and increasingly with future Chairman Xi's new cult of personality, as the purges have begun); that approach means they can do anything at any time for any reason.
They even started hijacking boards in Hong Kong back in 2016:
WSJ 2017: "Since 2016, at least 32 Chinese state-owned companies or units listed in Hong Kong have proposed changes to their corporate structures to install Communist Party committees that advise their boards of directors." [1]
China isn't an ally of the US, they're a blend of enemy and super competitor. They don't freely allow US companies - such as Facebook, Google, Reddit, Twitter, Snapchat, Pinterest, Amazon AWS, and dozens of others - to operate inside of China. It's entirely reasonable to disallow some China-owned corporations from operating in the US as a matter of trade reciprocation.
[1] https://www.wsj.com/articles/now-advising-chinas-state-firms...
> The only reason ByteDance isn't selling TikTok for example, is because the CCP said they weren't allowed to because it would make China look weak; that's not a decision that is up to ByteDance, because they're not in control of anything ultimately.
It's not because the "CCP" said they weren't allowed to. It's because the government of the People's Republic of China issued a new policy against exporting sensitive technology. The government obviously had ByteDance in mind, but this was a government policy issued in the normal way, not anything to do with Communist Party committees advising corporate boards. It's a response by the Chinese government to a measure taken by the American government against a Chinese company.
> They don't freely allow US companies [...] to operate inside of China.
A great many US companies freely operate inside China - many more than vice versa. China's economic development was largely driven by the "Reform and Opening-Up Policy." As the name suggests, a major part of that policy was allowing foreign companies to invest in China. Foreign companies did invest massively in China, gaining market access and taking advantage of Chinese labor. If you walk around any major Chinese city nowadays, you'll see the result: foreign companies are everywhere. Volkswagens, Hondas and Toyotas fill the streets. There's a Starbucks, McDonald's or KFC on every other corner. Everyone walks around with smartphones filled with American electronics. Chinese airlines fly fleets of Boeing and Airbus planes. The computers all run Windows or OS X. The idea that US companies can't operate in China is just very far from the reality, which is that US companies have a massive presence in China.
It's not because the "CCP" said they weren't allowed to. It's because the government of the People's Republic of China issued a new policy against exporting sensitive technology. The government obviously had ByteDance in mind, but this was a government policy issued in the normal way, not anything to do with Communist Party committees advising corporate boards. It's a response by the Chinese government to a measure taken by the American government against a Chinese company.
> They don't freely allow US companies [...] to operate inside of China.
A great many US companies freely operate inside China - many more than vice versa. China's economic development was largely driven by the "Reform and Opening-Up Policy." As the name suggests, a major part of that policy was allowing foreign companies to invest in China. Foreign companies did invest massively in China, gaining market access and taking advantage of Chinese labor. If you walk around any major Chinese city nowadays, you'll see the result: foreign companies are everywhere. Volkswagens, Hondas and Toyotas fill the streets. There's a Starbucks, McDonald's or KFC on every other corner. Everyone walks around with smartphones filled with American electronics. Chinese airlines fly fleets of Boeing and Airbus planes. The computers all run Windows or OS X. The idea that US companies can't operate in China is just very far from the reality, which is that US companies have a massive presence in China.
The US government will try to reduce Chinese ownership in Tiktok.
Bytedance will try to resist fire sales.
What's the best compromise? Have an IPO in the US and have a lot of US investors in the deal, diluting Bytedance.
Bytedance will try to resist fire sales.
What's the best compromise? Have an IPO in the US and have a lot of US investors in the deal, diluting Bytedance.
What if the the IPO happens but a single large/majority chunk of stock ends up being Chinese investors?
That's business for ya. POTUS doesn't really care about anything other than optics. Claim the win, move on. We live in a post-fact world now.
[deleted]
Depends on whether they'll go through the full vetting process normally required for IPOing companies. Chinese companies have historically managed to refuse the vetting process when they're listed on US stock exchanges.
Trump is somehow trying to make money out of this. He has repeatedly said money needs to be paid to the US Govt. By US Govt, given his corruption record, we'll have to assume it means him or his family.
He has been able to pay quite a lot of money to his own pocket via his hotels and such, but I'm not sure whether they'd be that blatant.
Oracle seems to be getting a sweetheart deal from the government here, and Larry Ellison has donated substantial amounts to Trump's campaign.
Maybe that's not outright corruption, but it would raise eyebrows in any Western democracy.
Maybe that's not outright corruption, but it would raise eyebrows in any Western democracy.
If this is their secret weapon for the election then it's not a very good one. If we make a simple division of the population into 4 groups, we'll have
1. People who are ambivalent i.e. don't care or aren't familiar with the app
2. People who are strongly against it for a variety of reasons
3. People who are in favour because it's a blow scored against the Chinese
4. People who are in favour due to their feelings about the app specifically
It seems likely to me that the second grouping will be the largest. I don't think much will come of it but it will take much, much more than this to neuter China. It's not quite as vacuous "Build the wall" but it's not far off - if you want to battle china economically, get trading with their competitors (i.e. vote for centrists - Bernie is almost as protectionist as Trump)
1. People who are ambivalent i.e. don't care or aren't familiar with the app
2. People who are strongly against it for a variety of reasons
3. People who are in favour because it's a blow scored against the Chinese
4. People who are in favour due to their feelings about the app specifically
It seems likely to me that the second grouping will be the largest. I don't think much will come of it but it will take much, much more than this to neuter China. It's not quite as vacuous "Build the wall" but it's not far off - if you want to battle china economically, get trading with their competitors (i.e. vote for centrists - Bernie is almost as protectionist as Trump)
I'm concerned about China's policy of heavy-handed protectionism and censorship internally while benefitting from global markets externally.
But I don't like this tit-for-tat action by the US. Cutting off Tiktok will only further accelerate the balkanization of the internet. Keeping US companies from kataoing to the Chinese regime with special concessions (e.g. Dragonfly) and making services too important to easily firewall off (e.g. GitHub) seems like a better strategy. At least I hope so.
But I don't like this tit-for-tat action by the US. Cutting off Tiktok will only further accelerate the balkanization of the internet. Keeping US companies from kataoing to the Chinese regime with special concessions (e.g. Dragonfly) and making services too important to easily firewall off (e.g. GitHub) seems like a better strategy. At least I hope so.
> I'm concerned about China's policy of heavy-handed protectionism and censorship internally while benefitting from global markets externally.
Foreign companies benefited enormously from the opening up of the Chinese market, and China is not nearly as protectionist as it's made out to be. Western media has trouble entering China because of political censorship, but Western businesses in general have very good market access. China is a very significant market for most major US tech companies.
Foreign companies benefited enormously from the opening up of the Chinese market, and China is not nearly as protectionist as it's made out to be. Western media has trouble entering China because of political censorship, but Western businesses in general have very good market access. China is a very significant market for most major US tech companies.
Western business do not have good market access. Just look at what’s happened with Disney. Spend years and years censoring movies and gaining favour of the CCP to get access to the market and a single movie ends up destroying their reputation overnight.
Completely BS. When I was walking through shopping mall in Beijing, for a moment I thought I’m in New York, all western brands. What are you talking about?
So you see some brands in china and that means that brand’s have 0 issues getting into china market? But ignoring that those brands can’t easily get the money they make out of china, they don’t own the subsidiary in china, and if china decides to boycott the brand, it actually means something compared to boycott in the west which is just something people say and don’t follow through on.
You don't just see "some brands" in China. They're everywhere, on a completely different scale than Chinese brands in the US. In practice, American companies have a much larger presence in China than vice versa.
> they don’t own the subsidiary in china
This is a common misconception. Foreign companies can own their subsidiaries in most sectors of the Chinese economy.
> those brands can’t easily get the money they make out of china
China has capital flow controls. Foreign companies are still able to expatriate their profits. Apple takes in about $45 billion in revenue per year in China, and there must be a hefty profit associated with that revenue. Do you think Apple's profits get trapped in China?
> they don’t own the subsidiary in china
This is a common misconception. Foreign companies can own their subsidiaries in most sectors of the Chinese economy.
> those brands can’t easily get the money they make out of china
China has capital flow controls. Foreign companies are still able to expatriate their profits. Apple takes in about $45 billion in revenue per year in China, and there must be a hefty profit associated with that revenue. Do you think Apple's profits get trapped in China?
You cannot just start a WFOE business inm china. You can’t just take money out of china. Apple is a giant company with an insane amount of money to pay off whoever they need to.
> You cannot just start a WFOE business in china
Nonsense. WFOEs are common in China. The acronym exists for a reason.
> You can’t just take money out of china.
There are several channels that companies can use to expatriate profits.
> Apple is a giant company with an insane amount of money to pay off whoever they need to.
They don't have to pay people off. There are completely legal methods for them to expatriate their profits.
Nonsense. WFOEs are common in China. The acronym exists for a reason.
> You can’t just take money out of china.
There are several channels that companies can use to expatriate profits.
> Apple is a giant company with an insane amount of money to pay off whoever they need to.
They don't have to pay people off. There are completely legal methods for them to expatriate their profits.
Disney made a crappy movie that Chinese audiences hated. They took a classic Chinese story and made a mess of it. How is that the Communist Party's fault?
The revenues that Western companies generate in China speak for themselves. The image that many Westerners have, that China bars foreign businesses from entering its market, is so opposite from reality that it's difficult to even begin to respond. Just go to China and see for yourself how omnipresent foreign companies are. China's economic development was based on opening its markets to foreign investment.
The revenues that Western companies generate in China speak for themselves. The image that many Westerners have, that China bars foreign businesses from entering its market, is so opposite from reality that it's difficult to even begin to respond. Just go to China and see for yourself how omnipresent foreign companies are. China's economic development was based on opening its markets to foreign investment.
Considering no one can get an app published in China from the US all Chinese founded apps should be banned until policy changes in China and US apps get approved.
I'm so confused about what's going on now. First it was Microsoft, then it was a technology deal with Oracle, now it's Walmart? and Oracle taking a majority stake, spinning out the global operations? Oh and Trump thinks MS are still involved despite them saying their offer was rejected? Oh and the IPO is planned for long after the election so wouldn't? happen if Trump loses. Oh and meanwhile the likelihood of China letting themselves get bullied out of one of their biggest tech successes. How much of Google, Apple, and Facebook will have to spin off to Chinese corporations in return?
Not clear why you expect any less out of 2020.
It's more complex and nuanced than this what you've stated of course, why it's so confusing. Arguably, aside from security risk of the CCP having access to the data, banning apps is an leverage against the CCP having economic access to Americans to help influence the CCP to stopping their human rights abuses.
If the CCP had allowed the United Nations to visit the prisons/concentration camps to interview prisoners (etc) then this could have all quickly gone away, assuming the CCP was being honest about what was happening at these concentration camps and the UN could confirm that on the ground.
If the CCP had allowed the United Nations to visit the prisons/concentration camps to interview prisoners (etc) then this could have all quickly gone away, assuming the CCP was being honest about what was happening at these concentration camps and the UN could confirm that on the ground.
> the CCP having access to the data.
The data isn't the most valuable part. Which videos someone likes to watch could be worth something, but given how much easily available information there is already online this isn't a particularly valuable (or sensitive) thing.
The much bigger issue is the algorithm that decides what content to show people. The CCP could decide to leverage that black box to push content that influences users in the ways they desire. That's why the CCP passed a new law to allow them to ban the sale of the algorithm (and they've expressed their willingness to use that to actually block the sale of the TikTok algorithm). Their goal is to either keep control of that so they can influence international users or to keep their potential involvement opaque so that anyone who engages with the algorithm continues to be unaware of the fact that the CCP can push content to any user they want.
The data isn't the most valuable part. Which videos someone likes to watch could be worth something, but given how much easily available information there is already online this isn't a particularly valuable (or sensitive) thing.
The much bigger issue is the algorithm that decides what content to show people. The CCP could decide to leverage that black box to push content that influences users in the ways they desire. That's why the CCP passed a new law to allow them to ban the sale of the algorithm (and they've expressed their willingness to use that to actually block the sale of the TikTok algorithm). Their goal is to either keep control of that so they can influence international users or to keep their potential involvement opaque so that anyone who engages with the algorithm continues to be unaware of the fact that the CCP can push content to any user they want.
It was discovered the TikTok app was specifically gathering a lot more data from your phone than was relevant to the service at hand. This was a big thread on HN a little while back.
I do agree with your second point however.
I do agree with your second point however.
Sure. My point is that the data they collect isn't especially valuable given how much other data is easily accessible for a nation state. The value isn't zero but if the Chinese Government loses the data about what TikTok videos people watched they aren't going to lose any sleep over it.
There is absolutely nothing that would convince me that this administration cares about human rights.
Agreed, it's happenstance that it's an issue they could piggyback on looking for "tough on China" propaganda all for appearance purposes.
> CCP having access to the data
Wow, CCP will be able to slide into 17 year olds' DMs. Massive security threat.
So much of the TikTok hysteria has been built on "CCP will have X". Is there any verifiable proof at all that CCP is actively and illegally accessing user data through TikTok?
Wow, CCP will be able to slide into 17 year olds' DMs. Massive security threat.
So much of the TikTok hysteria has been built on "CCP will have X". Is there any verifiable proof at all that CCP is actively and illegally accessing user data through TikTok?
Linking a few of your own tweets to youtube videos is not very enlightening. Do you have an actual sourced article stating that the CCP is illegally accessing user data?
? I'm shocked the question needs to be posed.
All Chinese companies have CCP organs within them that the CPP uses to ensure the company adheres to party policy.
They are using the internet and all it's operating entities as a massive surveillance and enforcement machine.
Try posting a TikTok critical of China, or saying something about HK and see what happens.
The data from Chinese apps can be accessed by Xi & Co. whenever, for whatever purposes, including finding out who your friends are so they can be sanctioned/imprisoned as well.
Now - TikTok USA division - that's another story and it's hard to tell how far enforcement goes. Definitely it's censored and definitely there are elements of propaganda (you can tell from the content) but it's not hugely obvious. As far as data mining, I don't have specific information but I don't see any reason why they wouldn't have access to it just like WeChat.
FYI This is why WeChat is 100% banned and there's no option for them while TikTok has an option to cut off from the parent company.
[1] https://thediplomat.com/2019/12/politics-in-the-boardroom-th...
[2] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jul/25/china-business...
All Chinese companies have CCP organs within them that the CPP uses to ensure the company adheres to party policy.
They are using the internet and all it's operating entities as a massive surveillance and enforcement machine.
Try posting a TikTok critical of China, or saying something about HK and see what happens.
The data from Chinese apps can be accessed by Xi & Co. whenever, for whatever purposes, including finding out who your friends are so they can be sanctioned/imprisoned as well.
Now - TikTok USA division - that's another story and it's hard to tell how far enforcement goes. Definitely it's censored and definitely there are elements of propaganda (you can tell from the content) but it's not hugely obvious. As far as data mining, I don't have specific information but I don't see any reason why they wouldn't have access to it just like WeChat.
FYI This is why WeChat is 100% banned and there's no option for them while TikTok has an option to cut off from the parent company.
[1] https://thediplomat.com/2019/12/politics-in-the-boardroom-th...
[2] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jul/25/china-business...
Sorry, I misread the original question. I am not aware of the CCP accessing TikTok user data (for instance, to track dissidents or surreptitiously use it to compute social credit scores).
The chinese being able to use data to influence 100 million American lives by determining what content is shown to people within a chinese app is a national security threat.
I'd argue it's already happening, too.
In March and April, all I saw were Trump's worst moments- his blunders, his viciousness, his arrogance. My distaste for Trump heightened; I became more reactive and further triggered by his incompetence. Then, back in early June, every last thing I saw on TikTok was insane forms of rioting and the worst police brutality there was. TikTok effectively increases national attention to things like this.
The algorithm, of course, is reacting to my behavior- behavior which surely suggests that this is the type of content I "want" to see. If I go searching for basketball videos, I can teach the algorithm to populate my feed with them quite easily. But I never used the search bar.
The danger of the echo-chamber, rabbit hole aspect of the algorithm combined with TikTok potentially hand-selecting the types of content to push by default to American people to stir political dissension is very much there.
In March and April, all I saw were Trump's worst moments- his blunders, his viciousness, his arrogance. My distaste for Trump heightened; I became more reactive and further triggered by his incompetence. Then, back in early June, every last thing I saw on TikTok was insane forms of rioting and the worst police brutality there was. TikTok effectively increases national attention to things like this.
The algorithm, of course, is reacting to my behavior- behavior which surely suggests that this is the type of content I "want" to see. If I go searching for basketball videos, I can teach the algorithm to populate my feed with them quite easily. But I never used the search bar.
The danger of the echo-chamber, rabbit hole aspect of the algorithm combined with TikTok potentially hand-selecting the types of content to push by default to American people to stir political dissension is very much there.
Is Facebook also owned by the CCP? Because that's the same kind of divisive content I see on FB. No need for TikTok to get this result, it is the byproduct of US politics.
Yeah, I'm struggling to see the connection here... All social media was absolutely inundated at those same times with those same events. Twitter was the worst by far. I had to uninstall the app after a while because it was just so full of negativity it was really starting to affect my mental health.
People are complaining about a necessary byproduct of the US "globalization" strategy. It was a necessary result that in just a few years another country puts together technology equal or superior to US and starts doing the same strategies US companies such as FB have been using for a long time.
The problem is when there is no reciprocity.
The CCP plays the game unfairly and cheats blatantly.
The CCP plays the game unfairly and cheats blatantly.
Not really.
Facebook is not doing what WeChat is doing, not remotely close.
Facebook allows people to communicate, and censors some stuff that is hateful. You can say anything you want 'against America' on FB. The US government does not have access to FB data without jumping through a lot of legal hoops and process, and even then, it's on a case by case basis. The US government has no influence over FB otherwise.
WeChat is an organ of the state, they have internal staff who are CCP members who ensure party loyalty. They censor absolutely anything and everything they want, they can promote systems that are 'pro-China' and ban others. They can use any and all data for purposes of control and suppression (social score etc.). If they have such apps in foreign countries they can access sensitive information, photos, communications, censor and effectuate propaganda.
Those are not very comparable entities.
Facebook is not doing what WeChat is doing, not remotely close.
Facebook allows people to communicate, and censors some stuff that is hateful. You can say anything you want 'against America' on FB. The US government does not have access to FB data without jumping through a lot of legal hoops and process, and even then, it's on a case by case basis. The US government has no influence over FB otherwise.
WeChat is an organ of the state, they have internal staff who are CCP members who ensure party loyalty. They censor absolutely anything and everything they want, they can promote systems that are 'pro-China' and ban others. They can use any and all data for purposes of control and suppression (social score etc.). If they have such apps in foreign countries they can access sensitive information, photos, communications, censor and effectuate propaganda.
Those are not very comparable entities.
This is nonsense, the CCP has millions of members in China, the same way that Democrats and Republicans are infiltrated in every company in America. The American national security agencies (NSA, etc.) are infiltrated in every large American corporation, especially in the technology area. You're just creating an excuse (political affiliation) to demonize a country's entire industry.
i really wonder in what world you are living. When was the last time the US government acticely censored FB or twitter or snapchat?
now try to find some ccp critical content on WeChat or TikTok (eg videos of Hong Kong protest). Especially while being on mainland China.
please let us know how it went
now try to find some ccp critical content on WeChat or TikTok (eg videos of Hong Kong protest). Especially while being on mainland China.
please let us know how it went
I you say something about Trump on Facebook, there is a 0% chance it will be censored by the CIA. There is a tiny chance it will be censored if you are calling for violence.
If you say something about Xi that is negative on WeChat there is almost a 100% chance it will be censored.
They have an Army of censors controlling all thoughts, making sure everyone is line with party ideals.
The comparison can't even be made materially - where do people get their information from? It's scary.
If you say something about Xi that is negative on WeChat there is almost a 100% chance it will be censored.
They have an Army of censors controlling all thoughts, making sure everyone is line with party ideals.
The comparison can't even be made materially - where do people get their information from? It's scary.
Would you please stop using HN primarily for political/ideological/national battle? I don't want to have to ban you again but you're clearly not using this site as intended.
If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and sticking to the rules when posting here, we'd be grateful.
If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and sticking to the rules when posting here, we'd be grateful.
> 0% chance it will be censored by the CIA.
Well, yeah, even when the US does violate the overt guarantees in its Constitution to suppress internal dissent, it's not the foreign intelligence service that is the direct vehicle. Mostly, it’s the FBI/Justice Department.
Well, yeah, even when the US does violate the overt guarantees in its Constitution to suppress internal dissent, it's not the foreign intelligence service that is the direct vehicle. Mostly, it’s the FBI/Justice Department.
" then this could have all quickly gone away"
That's only a small part of what Trump cares about.
Security and trade are much bigger concerns.
Also - this is an election ploy to 'look tough'.
That's only a small part of what Trump cares about.
Security and trade are much bigger concerns.
Also - this is an election ploy to 'look tough'.
It’s really not that nuanced at all. Trump blames TikTok for ruining his first rally, when people used the platform to register for an event they had no intention of going to.
Just like Trump is going after Twitter and FB for being “unfair to conservatives”.
Just like Trump is going after Twitter and FB for being “unfair to conservatives”.
Plus it was removed from the Appstores today or something? Is that going to get reverted then? This is so chaotic which is not unexpected when Trump is involved.
The overall story is crazy.
But a lot of different players coming and going to see if they want to buy something, that's not unheard of.
But a lot of different players coming and going to see if they want to buy something, that's not unheard of.
> How much of Google, Apple, and Facebook will have to spin off to Chinese corporations in return
You haven’t kept up on China’s policies on these companies over the past decade have you?
You haven’t kept up on China’s policies on these companies over the past decade have you?
Can you clarify what you mean?
Google and Facebook were banned long ago in China - if anything these actions are retaliation for that.
Apple has been allowed in but has had to divest all data hosting to Chinese controlled companies.
Apple has been allowed in but has had to divest all data hosting to Chinese controlled companies.
This is a point most people seem to forget. In simpler terms it's retaliation - granted they could have done this a long time a go? maybe... but right now there are other interests at stake as well.
Google wasn't banned. They pulled out due (primarily) to requirement that they censor search results.
[deleted]
That is still saying the same thing, isn't it?
[deleted]
For a free app without any revenue.
It's like the parasitic Cordyceps mushroom.
It's like the parasitic Cordyceps mushroom.
[deleted]
Why hasn't twitter relaunched vine? The market is very different now from when they shut it down. I'm surprised that investors haven't demanded it yet.
Dom Hofmann, one of the cofounders of Vine launched Byte which is basically a new Vine: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byte_(app). I don't know if it's catching on though. I guess if TikTok does get banned we'll see a mass migration somewhere.
I don't keep up with the new social media - but I am wondering why TikTok succeeded where Vine failed?
Better recommendation engine
Vine launched in 2012. There probably wasn't a critical mass of mobile phone owners, specifically teens, at that time. The iPhone hit the market only five years earlier.
I haven't tried it but everybody says TikTok's magic ingredient is the AI behind recommendations.
It's difficult to understand why Microsoft wouldn't buy this. With some clever marketing I'm sure they could grow the username rapidly and it would cost less than 1% of whatever TikTok would cost.
They tried, but apparently the sale was blocked due to AI export control laws in China.
i think he means why didn't they buy the rights to the name "vine"
Why? The hard part isn't building a Vine or TikTok clone. It's getting 800M people to come and use it.
Really depends. They made and then shut down Mixer, their Twitch competitor, because no one was using it.
Bytedance paid $1 billion in advertisements in 2018. Anyone remember how annoying and ubiquitous their ads were?
That was on top of purchasing Musically for $800m, partially for their existing U.S. user base.
That was on top of purchasing Musically for $800m, partially for their existing U.S. user base.
There's also Google launching YouTube Shorts, but who knows when they'll send it to Google Graveyard.
Google Graveyard is in maintainance mode, and is not accepting new burials I'm afraid.
> I guess if TikTok does get banned we'll see a mass migration somewhere.
Mass migration to Canada Tiktok.
Mass migration to Canada Tiktok.
Instagram already launched a better TikTok and it's growing rapidly.
That's great but vine had and still has a great brand. Hopefully there is somebody competent at Elliott pushing for this golden egg to be hatched.
> That's great but vine had and still has a great brand
Gen Z doesn't even know what vine is. That's the majority of tiktok users. Reels and TikTok already have the brand. Relaunching vine would be dumb. Only millennials would care and it would just be the millennials that used it before, not new users.
Gen Z doesn't even know what vine is. That's the majority of tiktok users. Reels and TikTok already have the brand. Relaunching vine would be dumb. Only millennials would care and it would just be the millennials that used it before, not new users.
Why do you think Reels is superior to TikTok?
Its interesting how DonnyT ran his 2016 campaign on trade with China, and now by virtue of opening his mouth, more people than ever are aware of certain questionable actions taken by semi-nationalized Chinese companies. I'm not sure thats a bad thing, all things considered.
i think someone in his administration understand China better than all the previous. American have this belief that if you bring China into WTO. the open trade with China and free flow of commerce should transform China into a democracy. after 40 yrs, we see none of that. 8 yrs of Obama/Biden soft on anything China to the point of appeasement. (Chinese expansion on South China sea) Chinese CCP have only grow stronger and Xi have consolidated all powers into himself. Xi is more powerful than Mao.
what we are seeing from Trump admin is 1. seperate Chinese people from CCP. i think that hit hard to the point that Xi have to come out and said CCP is UN-separable from Chinese people. 2. trying out how to use National security to hit Chinese companies like what we are seeing right now and with Huawei.
it will be interesting to watch geopolitics in coming years if Trump win re-election. if Biden win, then it just back to Obama's era policies.
what we are seeing from Trump admin is 1. seperate Chinese people from CCP. i think that hit hard to the point that Xi have to come out and said CCP is UN-separable from Chinese people. 2. trying out how to use National security to hit Chinese companies like what we are seeing right now and with Huawei.
it will be interesting to watch geopolitics in coming years if Trump win re-election. if Biden win, then it just back to Obama's era policies.
The methods are different, but Obama's attempt for a power block outside China was smarter, ofc the current administration threw that overboard.
Now it's just US vs. China instead of the world "vs" China.
The current attempt may be way more visible, but I wouldn't say better. Since China is still expanding and the US ( under Trump) stands alone.
Now it's just US vs. China instead of the world "vs" China.
The current attempt may be way more visible, but I wouldn't say better. Since China is still expanding and the US ( under Trump) stands alone.
You make a very weak argument that Obama’s administration was soft on China. Your only point is strategy in the South China Sea and unless you’re privy to US Navy posturing and what our coordination with Japanese naval forces was at that time, you can’t definitively say that it is any different now.
I guess I am in the "crazy conspiracy-theorist" minority here but I see it as an actual security situation.
And I believe the reason they are talking about Microsoft and Oracle is because the intelligence agencies are suggesting that it would actually be a good outcome if they were able to effectively access that userbase. Whereas it is not tolerable otherwise.
Monitoring and controlling millions of people's information streams is a national security issue. And whether people want to believe it or not, all countries have propaganda programs.
What you see in your feed becomes your reality.
And just in case the above isn't enough to get buried, I will throw out an even crazier theory. TikTok is such mindless garbage it's reducing attention spans of kids even more. It may actually be making American children even stupider.
So, to sum up, I think WWIII started with Covid and TikTok is just part two.
Just kidding. Sort of. I hope.
And I believe the reason they are talking about Microsoft and Oracle is because the intelligence agencies are suggesting that it would actually be a good outcome if they were able to effectively access that userbase. Whereas it is not tolerable otherwise.
Monitoring and controlling millions of people's information streams is a national security issue. And whether people want to believe it or not, all countries have propaganda programs.
What you see in your feed becomes your reality.
And just in case the above isn't enough to get buried, I will throw out an even crazier theory. TikTok is such mindless garbage it's reducing attention spans of kids even more. It may actually be making American children even stupider.
So, to sum up, I think WWIII started with Covid and TikTok is just part two.
Just kidding. Sort of. I hope.
You think it's dangerous to have access to social networks not under US control?
Many governments would, of course, agree, but this is traditionally the domain of governments seen as "authoritarian", such as, e.g., China. (Is it reasonable China does not let its citizens access Facebook?)
Many governments would, of course, agree, but this is traditionally the domain of governments seen as "authoritarian", such as, e.g., China. (Is it reasonable China does not let its citizens access Facebook?)
$50 billion market value, 25,000 employees? This is for a short video sharing app, right? I'm confused both by the apparent market value of the company and the number of employees proposed for the US operations. Seems orders of magnitude off for what the app does, even at the scale that it does.
You mention the number of employees and the complexity of the software. Neither matters for the valuation. Maybe it should, but it's not what the market cares about at this stage of the company.
The $50B is for the 100M users MAUs, 50M of which are active daily[1]. They have a billion downloads as well.
As a comparison, Facebook paid $1B for 30-40M signups on Instagram2[2][3]. Their MAUs and DAUs at the time would've been a small fraction of that.
So if we consider TikTok's downloads to be equivalent to Instagram's signups, the valuation isn't crazy at all (especially since TikTok has revenue).
1. https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/24/tiktok-reveals-us-global-use...
2. https://www.vox.com/2017/4/9/15235940/facebook-instagram-acq...
3. https://techcrunch.com/2012/04/13/instagrams-user-count-now-...
The $50B is for the 100M users MAUs, 50M of which are active daily[1]. They have a billion downloads as well.
As a comparison, Facebook paid $1B for 30-40M signups on Instagram2[2][3]. Their MAUs and DAUs at the time would've been a small fraction of that.
So if we consider TikTok's downloads to be equivalent to Instagram's signups, the valuation isn't crazy at all (especially since TikTok has revenue).
1. https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/24/tiktok-reveals-us-global-use...
2. https://www.vox.com/2017/4/9/15235940/facebook-instagram-acq...
3. https://techcrunch.com/2012/04/13/instagrams-user-count-now-...
It's not about what the app does, it's about the eyeballs looking at it.
Tiktok is not the only product of BytesDance. It developed tons of other apps in China market.
Too many parties in this whole drama are too incentivized to spread FUD, or at least not debunk it, for anyone with only public information to really understand what’s going on.
I'm about as anti this administration as they come, but I'm not altogether opposed to some semblance of reciprocity in what China allows of US internet companies, and vice versa. I haven't followed this specific case closely enough to have an informed opinion of how it's being handled.