• BigBenis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    While the whole situation is shitty, I find it hard to believe a massive company would shut down services for 12 hours, losing millions in revenue and likely millions of users, all as a PR stunt for a foreign leader.

  • 2ugly2live@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    67
    ·
    1 month ago

    Lmao, yes.

    He “brought it back” before he was even in office. And since no one looks up anything, I’m sure it did it’s job.

    • CosmoNova@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 month ago

      How do people not see through this theatre? It wasn’t even subtle. Oh right, the brainrot…

  • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 month ago

    I really doubt it. Trump just did the obvious, grabbed the low hanging fruit, and contradicted the Biden administration because that’s all he can do. No conspiracy needed; that would afford trump forethought and cunning he isn’t capable of. He can’t think past his next Big Mac or tweet.

    • zeca@lemmy.eco.br
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      you underestimate too much. trump is just a face, there are plenty of people working with him and planning all kinds of shit. any kid plans some trickeries while playing board games. what makes you think a political group is incapable of forethought?

  • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Can someone explain to me how they believe the Trump team convinced Biden to sign the ban?

    If you think it was a stunt for the benefit of Trump, you’re implying the Biden admin was in on it. Doesn’t make sense to me. Seems the more likely scenario is Biden just royally fucked up again to the point of somehow making Trump look good.

    • Beej Jorgensen@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      I thought the stunt was on the part if TikTok. They shut down when they didn’t have to and then came back on all chummy with Trump when he announced the 90 day extension. The play was to kiss Trump’s ass. Biden signed it and they took advantage of the situation.

  • Obinice@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Given that he was the one that called for it to be banned extremely vocally, and he’s not been able to keep it banned for more than a few hours even as the now leader of that country, seemingly caving under pressure to flip his stance on the matter (showing off the bat that he’s very politically weak)…

    I don’t see how this makes him look anything but weak, or inept.

    • foggenbooty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 month ago

      Ahh, but see you’re been following this over several months/years, or looked up what actually happened. You’re not the target for this dupe.

      This tactic works incredibly well as you’ll find you are outside the norm. I still remember people ranting about how Obama was late responding to Hurricane Katrina.

      Welcome to Politics 2.0 where the information is freely available but the facts don’t matter.

    • Spookyghost@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      “Caving under pressure”? This is a massive win for him, he just got every single major corp app out there to agree to push his agenda and thrawrt his opponents. How many posts today have been showing search results in various apps being fucky?

      Bytedance didnt have to block their app yesterday, they did it perfomantly, and virtually everyone bought it hook like and sinker.

      You are dreaming if you think the perception of this event to the average person is the weakness of a certain inflated organge hemmoroid.

      His cohort of billionare buddys now control discussion and content on a hugely concerning portion of all public communication channels that currently exist.

      Humans on average are already disappointingly stupid. Now this administration is actively discoraging free, critical thought and discussion and encouraging the use of algorithmically powered, emotionally draining, knowledge obfuscating, personal data collection software viruses that people willingly install.

      On those apps he and his friends look like amazing heroes, and will for the next 4 years, regardless of the events of reality. Then we will have to vote with millions of people who only use these apps for information. Best of luck to us all.

  • seven_phone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    1 month ago

    Why, he had no need of it whatsoever, unfathomably he has won control of everything and owes no one anything. Also the world is just not this well managed, it’s all just chaos and carnage and design in hindsight.

    • jacksilver@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      Then why mention his name at all. It’s just like the covid checks, Trump demands/wants the attention.

    • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 month ago

      Ah, but he does need something… continual attention and praise. Narcissists gonna narcissist.

  • Freefall@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 month ago

    Yeah, the super obvious political stunt was a political stunt. It only fools those that don’t pay any attention or don’t know how anything works. Biden said he would not enforce the order, that trump signed during his first term, to ban tiktok. Then tiktok chose to shut itself down for a day and chose to turn itself back on with its political pandering notice. It is all to manipulate it’s users while also paying fealty to the incoming president (because China knows that is how easy he is to control).

  • kvasir476@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    35
    ·
    1 month ago

    I don’t think there was any grand Machiavellian scheme. Trump just capitalized on historic democrat incompetence to make himself look good.

    • Guntrigger@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      1 month ago

      Which part of Trump proposing, implementing and then yesterday delaying the ban was down to Democrat incompetence?

      • kvasir476@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        24
        ·
        1 month ago

        Please explain how Trump managed to implement this ban with a democrat controlled senate and Joe Biden as president.

        • Guntrigger@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          18
          ·
          1 month ago

          Thanks, I’ll field this extremely easy question - By executive order before it was a bipartisan bill supported by every level of government:

          In 2020, President Donald Trump proposed a ban of the app as he viewed it as a national security threat. In August, he signed an executive order instructing that ByteDance divest from the app, though the order was blocked by a court injunction in September and was reversed by the Biden administration in 2021.

          To me, making sure that everyone agrees with a new policy before it becomes law, and sending it through the proper channels to be debated and then enacted, doesn’t really seem like a dumb thing.

          The dumb thing would be to propose a new law, enact it unilaterally, have it revoked because it was enacted unilaterally, then have everyone agree on it anyway when you pass it through the proper channels, then toss it in the trash yourself at literally the first opportunity.

                • atrielienz@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  The law stipulates that the POTUS is the person who determines that a platform or app is in violation. Once that happens, an investigation is launched through the AG’s office and applicable agencies. After that the AG’s office makes a determination about whether or not the app/platform is in violation of the law. Once that happens, the platform or app can appeal. But if they lose that appeal then they have a limited time to divest to another entity before their platform is banned and the POTUS can pause not revoke this process for a period of time (to give the app time to divest as is required). So basically Trump now has given Tik Tok a stay of execution so to speak but that doesn’t mean they won’t be forced to shut down or divest.

                  This was a direct politically planned and intended effect of this push so close to the inauguration, so far as I can tell. It’s politicians doing political stuff.

                  Right now he looks like the savior (and that’s intentional, both Tik Tok and Trump get something out of that). But in the long term I don’t know that most Tik Tok users are going to remember that Trump bought the app back and to actually remove the law requires an act of Congress. That will take more time than the limited amount that Trump can essentially delay the removal of the app from app stores and American servers.

                  I honestly think this was a fuck you to Trump from Biden because essentially Biden’s political career is over. Trump is going to do a lot of damage over the next 4 years and do as much as he can to undo any of the progress that has been made. It’s kind of a petty move on Biden’s part, but Trump started this colossal movement against Tik Tok in the first place.

        • massive_bereavement@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          I think both of you are right: The idea of banning TikTok came during his presidency and he campaigned for it.
          However it was a policy supported by Biden and with bipartisan vote, which means Dems were playing at home, so it was on them to not look stupid.

          It is mentioned in some news that the Facebook people pushed a lot for TikTok’s ban so they could capitalize on a user exodus, though that TikTok feasts on user data and shares it back in China is also true. However you don’t solve that with a ban, you solve that with a proper privacy policy. But no US company wants that, no sir. So the Dems were played like the devil went down to Georgia and they were the proverbial fiddle.

          But… I guess saying this is preaching to the choir as most people in here are dutifully aware of privacy. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    • aname@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 month ago

      If we were talking about a sane person, I don’t see why a person cannot change his mind.

      Trump is just playing the fools.

      • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Trump doesn’t have a mind to change. I doubt he even remembers he ever proposed a ban and this is just some advisor telling him that doing the opposite of Biden will get him likes.

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 month ago

      How so? It was politically convenient to go after TikTok when he did it, and it’s politically convenient to reverse course now. That’s a pretty consistent gameplan from Trump, attack something when it’s popular, reverse when reversing is popular.

      • small44@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 month ago

        When he came with the ban idea he used the same argument of national security that is the hypocritical part. Like you say the real reason is just political convenient

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          He also claimed national security when he messed with tariffs. At this point, it’s just an excuse to do something to grab headlines.

      • Freefall@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        It is more in line with a puppet, that has zero understanding of anything, being told what to say as it is convenient.

      • Initiateofthevoid@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        29
        ·
        1 month ago

        Hypocrisy: The practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess; falseness.

        Holding a position when politically convenient and reversing your stance on that position due to political convenience is hypocrisy. It may be typical and expected, but it’s still hypocrisy.

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 month ago

          But Trump has no values or beliefs, the only thing he’s consistent about it putting his name in headlines. So reversing is absolutely consistent with his values.

              • Windex007@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                1 month ago

                That’s irrelevant. When he says “I believe X”, he is professing that he believes something. Just because we know he’s lying doesn’t mean he isn’t saying it.

                That kinda logic scares the hell out of me, btw. People are just so numb to it that it’s like their brains are short circuiting.

                • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  That’s kind of like random people confessing to killing Brian Thompson. Is it really a confession if everyone knows you’re lying? Likewise, is it really a protestation if neither the speaker nor listener believes it?

          • Initiateofthevoid@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            1 month ago

            Hypocrisy: The practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess

            Having no values or beliefs and being self-consistent with ulterior personal values does not change the definition of the word.

            If one professes beliefs, feelings, or values that one does not possess, one is a hypocrite.

              • Initiateofthevoid@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                1 month ago

                Yes.

                Profess: 1) To affirm openly; declare or claim. 2) To make a pretense of; pretend.

                If one makes a pretense of holding beliefs, feelings, or values that one does not hold, one is a hypocrite.

                Whether anyone else understands the pretenses of the hypocrite or not does not change the definitions of the words.

          • sem@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            It used to be that politicians suffered in the polls when they flip flopped, but the only one Trump would suffer is if he went against his base.

            Like when he floated that maybe the covid vaccine was ok.

            • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 month ago

              Honestly, his base tends to follow him, so as long as it’s not a core belief, he could flip on a number of things without incident.

              It’s disgusting and I really don’t understand why his base tolerates it.

              • Evkob (they/them)@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 month ago

                I really don’t understand why his base tolerates it.

                Because the relationship between him and his “base” isn’t one between citizens and politician, it’s a literally a cult following their leader.

    • jaemo@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 month ago

      Trump’s basically a fractal hypocrisy, which is, as I understand it, why and how the grift keeps grifting.

  • recreationalcatheter@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    Yes.

    Do you know any dopamine addicts who lost their minds for a week straight? You know the ones. Giving more permissions to shady apps to scratch their itch?

    Sad world we live in lolol.