• CoopaLoopa@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    The directed scope of the bill is going to do the same thing to TikTok that legislation did to Juul.

    If you target Juul with legal repercussions for all their flavored vapes, then only Juul stops selling flavored pods. Now a million other disposable vape companies fill the void with flavored vapes that are worse for the ecosystem.

    Targeting TikTok will just lead to another foreign data-harvesting social media app popping up to fill its place.

    • PriorityMotif@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      It’s not about data harvesting, it’s about targeting users with political ideas. If you watch a video for a certain amount of time then they will continue showing you those types of videos. There’s tons of bad faith political targeting on TikTok just like every other platform. The issue is that it’s difficult to avoid because the platform decides what you look at unlike other platforms.

      • furikuri@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        This is why I’m having trouble understanding why people are confused about the bill’s purpose, especially in the context of the last dozen years or so. Allowing a political rival to maintain control over a platform like this is granting them soft power. Even if I agree that companies like Meta should be more heavily regulated (though not in this manner), I can see why they’ve put a bandaid on the issue given that there’s a non-zero chance that TikTok’s content has been actively in the past few years