• ShepherdPie@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    TikTok is not a tool for its users, it is a tool for a for profit corporation

    That pretty much describes every corporation in existence.

    • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      8 months ago

      Some of them provide utility and some don’t, which is why we don’t allow children to drink, smoke, or gamble. If a company providing those goods and services targets those demographics it gets political action.

      Welcome to the nuance of society and the modern world.

      • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        8 months ago

        But they’re not disallowing children smoking, drinking, or gambling here. It’s more akin to disallowing children from drinking Smirnoff, smoking Marlboros, or playing blackjack and nothing else.

          • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            If this had anything to do with children, they’d be reigning them all in at once instead of wasting time singling one of many out.

            • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              8 months ago

              Even equating the arm of a militaristic expansionist dictatorship to a tech giant is disingenuous to its core, Google collects a shit ton of data but even that pales in comparison to TikTok’s absurd collection. But all of that aside, your argument is shit. Reign in every tech giant at once? Why? Why the hell is it all or none? I don’t even think the US Federal Government in its current state has enough authority to try that, at this point.

              That’s like choosing not to take a doctor’s license away unless you can take away every bad doctor’s license in the USA at one time.

              • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                8 months ago

                How do you suddenly go from comparing these platforms to alcohol and gambling, saying they have no actual utility, and saying ‘every little bit helps’ when it comes to regulation to asking why these companies actions should even be regulated and why the law should apply to them all equally, even going as far as comparing them to the role doctors play in society?

                That’s honestly one of the most abrupt 180-degree spins I’ve ever seen.

                • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  Fuck equal rights of a corporation to fuck people over with an addictive product that has no utility. Thats an equal right I cannot stand behind.

          • Gabu@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            8 months ago

            No it’s not, you absolute buffoon. It’s a step in the direction of narrative control.