Nothing, it's a ridiculous argument as a rationalization for arguing against the tiktok ban. I've seen a number of posts today trying to paint it as some attach on democracy or youth culture. The fact is that tiktok captures a giant amount of data and is directly accessible by a hostile foreign government. The ban makes sense.
The ban makes sense because companies in the US tried and failed horribly to gain traction in their youths. And it was critical of western governments being complicit in war crimes in Palestine.
Tell me, before tiktok, how many war crimes US commited were conveniently swept under the rug without consequences?
Can't have public be aware of that, can we now?
But US wants to shape the narratives for the rest of the world with facebook, instagram and twitter and others. Failing to do that in their own country, they want to ban it as a last ditch resort. Can't have narratives that don't align with their propaganda and be critical of their military industrial complexes.
But you do you. I have no horse in the race but I love the outrage when people are on the receiving end of "foreign influence in social media". Not like social media companies in the US were surveilling rest of the world for the last decade.
And it's not like US hasn't done this to Japan when it was going to become a better economy before.
Wow, what a bunch of crap. Are you really, really holding up tiktok as a bastion of truth? Are you not aware of the many was crimes that US soldiers have been involved with that have sparked global outage, way before tiktok existed, because there really is a free press?
The US doesn't have soldiers in Gaza, it's not commiting war crimes there. You can make a good case that the arms were providing to an ally are being used to commit a genocide, which is plenty bad enough, but don't weaken the term "war crime" by using it inappropriately. And it's not like people are only finding out about it through tiktok. Go read NPR and you'll see quite a lot about it. Read AP. Read Reuters.
But sure, go trust a site whose algorithms are controlled by the Chinese government and think that you aren't being manipulated. You do you.
Back in the day parks were well maintained by people who cared because they were a primary place many folks went to hang out.
Nowadays Xbox and the internet exist. So parks are much more poorly funded, poorly cleaned, and can be dangerous due to lack of oversight or supervision.
It depends a lot on where you are and where you go though. I went to a very nice park just last year that was clearly well maintained, and I've gone to some severely sketchy looking parks for the better part of a decade before that. As with all things, nothing is a monolith. But some parks are truly miserable now.
People have things they can do inside for fun now, ergo less people (especially less kids and teens) are visiting parks. Nobody visiting the park means nobody has a vested interest in working or paying to upkeep it, and nobody is complaining about its lack of upkeep.
I don't know man, even in my grandparent's youth, 19 teens to the 1930s, they complained that city parks were dangerous, full of trash, and often homeless camps. The only ones that weren't were parks that were in areas rich people spent a lot of time in. This seems to be the same today.
Ever been a teenager at a park? All that's there is grass and maybe some picnic tables. What're you gonna do? Smoke weed and sit? Throw a ball? The shit is boring and comes with weather.
Sounds to me like you were born old. I didn't say shit about tiktok. I don't use it. You're here to whine about others looking something you don't like.
TikTok suggested that its users should petition politicians and the public to prevent its punitive purchase. It’s just kids with degenerating attention spans.
I think it's very regional. Libraries and parks are going to get the first cuts when local government tightens its belts, they're often save havens for the unhoused or those otherwise let down by society, and together that means in many areas they're seen as maybe not unsafe, but not places overprotective parents want their kids going.
Absolutely. In fact, I have found that areas with the most disposable income also get the best city funding. So the people who can afford to pay for third spaces (restaurants, clubs, golfing) also have the nicest local parks and public spaces.
In my city, the low-income area local parks are literally paved with concrete and next to train tracks, busy streets and/or factories. It's utterly bullshit