this post was submitted on 25 Apr 2024
261 points (93.9% liked)
Technology
59148 readers
2689 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Nope. They'd probably move to YouTube shorts or some other lower quality copy of Vine.
They’d reluctantly use Shorts or Slides if there’s no alternative, but realistically it’ll be something new. TikTok’s absence creates a vacuum that could be a huge opportunity for a new platform.
I refuse to watch any vertical short videos but if I never see that bullshit fucking moving logo ever again, I’m happier
Doesn't pixelfed support shirt videos now?
We might even get pants videos in 2025.
What’s next? Hats? Shoes? The sky’s the limit.
Not out yet
TikTok creators I follow get miserable amounts of views on YouTube. Shorts algorithm is nowhere near as good as TT and it's missing loads of features that make TT unique. If those creators were forced to move they'd probably go with Instagram but that's a poor replacement too.
As a European I'm curious how TT will look like without Yanks. It's already much more usable after it was banned in India so there's that.
Because people who want tiktok content watch it in tiktok, and those who don't don't like the format in general.
If tiktok started hosting half an hour long documentaries it wouldn't be any wonder that nobody would watch them, as the userbase doesn't have the attention span for that and they aren't scrolling tiktok for that type of content.
I personally have only one user whose shorts I watch, B. Dylan Hollis. And even there I would much rather prefer longer videos, but I'll take what I can get.
I'm fairly sure that long term TikTok plans to do long form videos too and their current approach has a benefit of getting their foot in the door. No other competitor of YouTube managed to do that before.
The neat thing about TikTok algo is that that they introduce different things and fine tune it to your liking without making things stale. This means those that are there for short form videos will keep on seeing them and their flow won't be interrupted. Those that are interested in longer ones will be presented with them. It's already happening but UI really needs refinement as it's kinda jarring now. It's still much better than how YouTube is trying to force shorts on their current users though.
Or, just as likely, would download some VPN and go on.
They are going to reels
Which is in my opinion the actual goal here... The USA talks about free market and crap but usually cannot compete unless they make the rules, set the referees, start with double the money, can't go to jail and charge triple passing go
Either tiktok becomes an American company or leaves... Ah, the free market has spoken
People keep saying this and I'm struggling to understand where this idea is coming from. The bill isn't saying that they have to sell TikTok to a US company. They don't have to sell it to the US government, or an owner in the US. Just divorce the company from explicit control by the Chinese government. Currently, the government can request any data they want from TikTok and they are obligated to provided it. Similarly, business laws in China mean that the government can also push changes down into the company, like a tweak to the algorithm to influence foreign perceptions of a topic for example.
The requirements laid out in this bill are meant to break that obligation and influence. It doesn't say who should own the company - only who shouldn't.
You mean exactly like all big tech in the USA?
They have get a warrent to force getting data and I know of no legal obligation for platforms to change algorithms to promote or demote content. Even the twitter files showed that twitter employees voluntarily agreed to work with federal departments, but had no obligations to
This is important for people to understand.
I’m definitely of the opinion that this sort of treatment should be applied to other companies (the actual enforcement of “wellbeing” changes) and that this act is purely selfish when other tech companies are clearly abusing their users, but I also think it’s good to at least start here. I think this sort of uneven hand is shitty, but I see why the US govt would go this route.
I just wish user health was a higher priority than healthy profits. But that’s just not the case. By a long shot.
Republicans talk of a completely free market where monopolies are free to flouish. Democrats talk of a free market with regulations to spur competition and keep the consumer safe - like from being sold only rotten meat unless they pay top dollar.
Unfortunately the American gov't is now just a revolving door of C-level execs to plunder tax dollars for the bottom line and to fuck over they very same people generating the labor and paying the taxes.