Tedesche
@Tedesche@lemmy.world
- Comment on I'm OOTL: Why is TikTok being banned? 18 hours ago:
Exactly! So demoting those videos suggests that China is not using the algorithm to promote anti-american views.
??? You’re trying to have it both ways with this. I’m out.
- Comment on I'm OOTL: Why is TikTok being banned? 21 hours ago:
Amplifying the videos that show America’s response to antiracist movements would make America look like the racist country it is. Demoting them conceals that.
No, that doesn’t make sense. Amplifying shows of division in a country promotes the view that said country is flawed and weak, in this case along racial lines. China has plenty to gain by showing that.
And America is no less racist than China, btw. I would argue far less so.
They were hired to help identify and amplify US state department narratives, same reason CNN and Fox hires them.
That seems entirely speculative. There are plenty of other reasons to hire them. Can you provide evidence for your claim?
- Comment on I'm OOTL: Why is TikTok being banned? 21 hours ago:
It’s also fair to treat them differently on account of them not being unfriendly to the U.S. Regardless, I agree data privacy laws need to be improved across the board.
- Comment on I'm OOTL: Why is TikTok being banned? 22 hours ago:
It depends on the manner in which said “politically spicy videos” are being censored. If it’s being done in a manner that promotes Chinese narratives while demoting American narratives, that’s an entirely legitimate concern for the U.S. and I don’t really see why not demoting BLM videos is not in the CCP’s interest; videos that make America seem racist seems entirely in the interest of an Anti-American country.
I also don’t see why hiring former American intelligence operatives demonstrates a pro-American stance, as their motivations for doing so could be to learn about American intelligence-gathering methods while promoting Chinese interests.
- Comment on I'm OOTL: Why is TikTok being banned? 22 hours ago:
Which makes perfect sense. I don’t think this would be a thing if ByteDance was a British or Canadian company either. The issue is it’s Chinese, and China is an enemy of the U.S. right now.
- Comment on I'm OOTL: Why is TikTok being banned? 22 hours ago:
Yeah, I don’t trust corporations to do the right thing either, but at least their motivations are based on greed, not nationalistic concerns.
- Comment on I'm OOTL: Why is TikTok being banned? 22 hours ago:
Finally, someone who seems to be providing an answer based on objective fact rather than their own political perspective.
I’m getting the sense that the issue is simply that ByteDance is a Chinese company and their data farming is suspected of being accessible to the CCP, which may effectively be a means of spying on American citizens and as misinformation tactics. Not really any different the other way around, of course, but at least that makes sense as a rationale for banning it in the U.S.
- Comment on I'm OOTL: Why is TikTok being banned? 22 hours ago:
Good point. Seems like another issue of concern. As usual, the issue seems to be data privacy laws overall.
- Comment on I'm OOTL: Why is TikTok being banned? 22 hours ago:
China blocks much of the internet its citizens can access in order to preserve its ideological grip on their country. I share concerns about data privacy in the U.S., but I would definitely be more concerned about a foreign government (especially an enemy of the U.S.) having access to our private data than our own government or even our own corporations.
- Comment on I'm OOTL: Why is TikTok being banned? 22 hours ago:
Thanks. I’m getting the sense that, while ByteDance doesn’t collect any more information than Meta or Instagram, it’s info is suspected to be accessible by the CCP, which may be used for anti-US programs/policies, etc.
- Comment on I'm OOTL: Why is TikTok being banned? 22 hours ago:
Seems like the most honest answer so far. The U.S. doesn’t trust the CCP with its citizens’ data. No surprise there.
- Comment on I'm OOTL: Why is TikTok being banned? 22 hours ago:
Your link provided me with more proper information than your biased quick take, so thanks for that, I guess.
- Comment on I'm OOTL: Why is TikTok being banned? 22 hours ago:
Seems like you’re not really into the spirit of the forum, mate. Maybe just don’t comment if you have no answer to provide, hm?
- Submitted 23 hours ago to [deleted] | 68 comments
- Comment on Always a fan of simple instructions on how to do everyday things 1 day ago:
My problem is that look so similar to the “Oh, God, he’s not thinking about kissing me, is he?” look.
- Comment on Ordering coffee in the USA triggers me 2 days ago:
This “triggered” you?
I have to say, as a therapist who treats people with actual trauma, I find it mildly infuriating that people today use the word “triggered” to refer to something that mildly infuriates them. The concept of a mental health trigger refers specifically to something that reactivates a traumatic memory and induces serious distress in the person triggered. Using the term to refer to something that just annoys you trivializes and dilutes it as a term.
I get that language is a loving thing and people who use the term this way don’t mean to be trivializing the issues of people who have real trauma, but it still irks me whenever I see people use that word this way.
You do you, OP, don’t take this as serious criticism. I just felt the need to get that off my chest.
- Comment on LPT: always be an asshole so you don't miss great opportunities in life 2 days ago:
Not true. Money often does corrupt people, because money is very often the means to power, and power definitely corrupts most people over time.
- Comment on Dunkin' added achievements to their mobile app 4 days ago:
The sad thing is this kind of shit actually works on some people. Just how our brains are wired and some folks can’t resist.
- Comment on For work-sore hands 5 days ago:
It comes in jars?! And in tubes?!
I’m gettin’ one!
- Comment on Checking in 1 week ago:
Kat Dennings. Actress.
- Comment on Checking in 1 week ago:
Okay, you failed (passed?) the horny check, but on the upside you have good taste.
- Comment on Le Reddit Army is Here 2: Electric Boogaloo 2 weeks ago:
This is a Lemmy wet dream that is predictably going to come up dry as fuck.
- Comment on True true 2 weeks ago:
Okay, but only the Marisa Tomei version.
- Comment on NGL I would watch this 3 weeks ago:
There is no live-action movie in Ba Sing Se.
- Comment on Fair. 3 weeks ago:
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII HAAAAAAVE THE POWEEEEEEEEER!!!
- Comment on Why do people say things like "I didn't do nothing"? 4 weeks ago:
LOL, keep imagining demons, man. What a sad home for pearl-clutching recemongers Lemmy is.
- Comment on Why do people say things like "I didn't do nothing"? 4 weeks ago:
I think you and many other people in this thread have this ass to mouth and don’t know which end is which.
- Comment on Why do people say things like "I didn't do nothing"? 4 weeks ago:
it’s funny how you say I’m naive and then proceed to insist that your grammar rules are somehow more right than another’s.
Why is that funny? I fail to see how contending that grammatical rules are valid and valuable contradicts with the notion that you claiming “everyone has their own rules, get over it” is naïve. They’re not in contradiction at all.
While double negatives might be inappropriate in, for example, technical documents; there are a great number of contexts in which they’re quite common and normal. I’m not saying “rules” don’t broadly exist, but rather that they vary from place to place, culture to culture (including Sub and micro-cultures).
Nothing I said contradicts that. I simply pointed out that that’s no reason to disregard the rules of grammar.
By the way, you should look into the sorts of people who have historically agreed with you. Classists and racists. For example, Robert Lowth, who argued people sounded dumb, essentially, because it was illogical. Same with many of the grammarians in the US who consistently taught kids that ‘they sound dumb’ because they happen to have a colloquial dialect different than their own.
I made no such racist argument and for you to suggest that I’m racist merely because I pointed out that grammatical rules have purpose and utility simply demonstrates how little you understand the historical context you’re trying to weaponize and how eager you are to slander those who disagree with you as racist. You’re not winning yourself any real points for combatting racism, dude, you’re just exposing yourself as an empty virtue signaler.
- Comment on Single-bladed razors are superior! 4 weeks ago:
They’re definitely cheaper than using cartridge razors, but personally I found decent cartridge razors just get a closer shave than safety razors. And it wasn’t for failing to learn how to use a safety razor either. I used one for several years, got good at it, but later switched back to cartridge razors on a whim and found that they simply get reliably closer shave than a single blade does. I still use soap and a brush rather than canned shaving cream, because it is much better and more economical, but for me the closer shave that comes with a cartridge razor is worth the price.
- Comment on Why do people say things like "I didn't do nothing"? 4 weeks ago:
That’s naïve. One can appreciate differences in grammar usage and take them into account when trying to understand someone else in the context of cultural differences and still acknowledge that grammar has formal rules. If you’re just going to say that grammatical rules can be ignored, why bother teaching grammar at all? Because as much as there might be deviations from the norm, there is still a norm, and it’s important there is one. One cannot appreciate jazz without learning classical musical structures; the existence of jazz does not negate that music has said structures, and jazz wouldn’t be jazz without them.