9 ms·

I'm very serious. > US Government likes US Government control because it's themselves. I know. That doesn't tell me why China controlling a social media algor

by raydev 2y ago

I'm very serious. > US Government likes US Government control because it's themselves. I know. That doesn't tell me why China controlling a social media algorithm is inherently any worse from yours or my perspective. > They don't want an adversary to have control. Is the "adversary" claim not undermined by them being a primary trade partner?

kelnos 2y ago
> Is the "adversary" claim not undermined by them being a primary trade partner? No, because there's more nuance in the world than you seem to suggest.
tivert 2y ago
>>> So why is that less of a concern than China controlling a media delivery service? >> US Government likes US Government control because it's themselves. > I know. That doesn't tell me why China controlling a social media algorithm is inherently any worse from yours or my perspective. Why is it less of a concern to you if you control your bank account than if I do? If we're not making obvious distinctions today, you should give me your bank account credentials, since we're all the same. >> They don't want an adversary to have control. > Is the "adversary" claim not undermined by them being a primary trade partner? It is not. I have difficulty imagining your question is not founded on feigned ignorance. China is an adversary of the US. Some optimistic and naive Western politicians in the 90s thought making them a "primary trade partner" would cause political changes that would eliminate the rivalry. They were wrong, and weakened their countries in the process. That's been clear for like ten years. Now their mistake needs to be dealt with.
- raydev 2y ago
  > you should give me your bank account credentials, since we're all the same. How is this comparable to the media you're consuming?
  - tivert 2y ago
    > How is this comparable to the media you're consuming? If you can't see the point without tedious hand-holding, I can't help you.
    - lazyeye 2y ago
      I wonder if once any post goes up that is relevant China's interests, an email goes out from some department in the CCP govt, then hordes of Chinese advocates descend on the comments section, arguing, diverting, obsfucating, and muddying the waters so much that no sensible conclusion can ever be made.
      - raydev 2y ago
        I've been here for years, I just constantly see a lot of talk of harms but no details of what the harms are and it's tiring.
        lazyeye 2y ago
        The harms are so obvious I am wondering why I am even discussing it. Obviously giving your primary geo-strategic competitor (with a history of propaganda) access at massive scale to shape opinion, promote discord, polarisation etc etc in the next generation of youth is a bad thing. Not to mention the harvesting of personal data at massive scale and who knows how that might be used in the context of an AI-driven future. You'd have to be ridiculously naive not to see that.
        raydev 2y ago
        > to shape opinion, promote discord, polarisation etc etc in the next generation of youth is a bad thing I remain unconvinced that people aren't shaping their own opinions by continuing to pursue similar content to what they typically agree with already. And as we all know, at this current time TikTok's algo is indistinguishable from US competitors in the obvious way it buckets people into like-minded feeds + comments. At minimum we should be consistent in what we claim is the bad behavior. If the algo is really the problem, start regulating all of them and do it now. To do otherwise is hypocrisy. > who knows how that might be used in the context of an AI-driven future I'm not sure we want to legislate and set rules based on a "who knows". If the outcome is bad you need to define that bad outcome.
kortilla 2y ago
>Is the "adversary" claim not undermined by them being a primary trade partner? Absolutely not. Japan was a primary trade partner going into WW2. The US is actively preparing for wars over Taiwan.
insane_dreamer 2y ago
The gov doesn’t care about your perspective. trade partner does not exclude adversary. Look at US-Japan trade in the 30s up until just before WW2 when the US decision to embargo exports to Japan (to try to force Japan to stop its occupation of China) led to WW2. It was a pretty quick flip from major trading partner to war.

by raydev 2y ago

kelnos 2y ago

> Is the "adversary" claim not undermined by them being a primary trade partner? No, because there's more nuance in the world than you seem to suggest.

tivert 2y ago

>>> So why is that less of a concern than China controlling a media delivery service? >> US Government likes US Government control because it's themselves. > I know. That doesn't tell me why China controlling a social media algorithm is inherently any worse from yours or my perspective. Why is it less of a concern to you if you control your bank account than if I do? If we're not making obvious distinctions today, you should give me your bank account credentials, since we're all the same. >> They don't want an adversary to have control. > Is the "adversary" claim not undermined by them being a primary trade partner? It is not. I have difficulty imagining your question is not founded on feigned ignorance. China is an adversary of the US. Some optimistic and naive Western politicians in the 90s thought making them a "primary trade partner" would cause political changes that would eliminate the rivalry. They were wrong, and weakened their countries in the process. That's been clear for like ten years. Now their mistake needs to be dealt with.

raydev 2y ago
> you should give me your bank account credentials, since we're all the same. How is this comparable to the media you're consuming?
- tivert 2y ago
  > How is this comparable to the media you're consuming? If you can't see the point without tedious hand-holding, I can't help you.
  - lazyeye 2y ago
    I wonder if once any post goes up that is relevant China's interests, an email goes out from some department in the CCP govt, then hordes of Chinese advocates descend on the comments section, arguing, diverting, obsfucating, and muddying the waters so much that no sensible conclusion can ever be made.
    - raydev 2y ago
      I've been here for years, I just constantly see a lot of talk of harms but no details of what the harms are and it's tiring.
      - lazyeye 2y ago
        The harms are so obvious I am wondering why I am even discussing it. Obviously giving your primary geo-strategic competitor (with a history of propaganda) access at massive scale to shape opinion, promote discord, polarisation etc etc in the next generation of youth is a bad thing. Not to mention the harvesting of personal data at massive scale and who knows how that might be used in the context of an AI-driven future. You'd have to be ridiculously naive not to see that.
        raydev 2y ago
        > to shape opinion, promote discord, polarisation etc etc in the next generation of youth is a bad thing I remain unconvinced that people aren't shaping their own opinions by continuing to pursue similar content to what they typically agree with already. And as we all know, at this current time TikTok's algo is indistinguishable from US competitors in the obvious way it buckets people into like-minded feeds + comments. At minimum we should be consistent in what we claim is the bad behavior. If the algo is really the problem, start regulating all of them and do it now. To do otherwise is hypocrisy. > who knows how that might be used in the context of an AI-driven future I'm not sure we want to legislate and set rules based on a "who knows". If the outcome is bad you need to define that bad outcome.

kortilla 2y ago

>Is the "adversary" claim not undermined by them being a primary trade partner? Absolutely not. Japan was a primary trade partner going into WW2. The US is actively preparing for wars over Taiwan.

insane_dreamer 2y ago

The gov doesn’t care about your perspective. trade partner does not exclude adversary. Look at US-Japan trade in the 30s up until just before WW2 when the US decision to embargo exports to Japan (to try to force Japan to stop its occupation of China) led to WW2. It was a pretty quick flip from major trading partner to war.