261
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 25 Apr 2024
261 points (93.9% liked)
Technology
63023 readers
2477 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 other!
- 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
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
No?
The way you are speaking it's as if they mean to close down the whole thing. There is a whole rest of the world for them to operate in. Sure losing the US market would be a huge detriment, but the owners still might rather have it everywhere else, than keep it running in the US in someone else's hands.
They aren't being forced to sell their operations in the entire world, just the US. So, doesn't it make better financial sense, if all legal options to keep control fail, that they sell their US operation to another company, and at least get billions of dollars before exit, than to just lose the market and get not billions?
They don't want to seed a competitor with their tech.
They are going to get one when a western tech company copies them to fill the vacuum they left. Their only real advantage is their leg-up with their earlier footing. There is nothing particularly interesting in their software, it's easy to copy, and someone likely will. If they do not get a copycat, their crowd will move on to some other thing and, being in the same industry, will still be a competitor.
When? Instagram/Facebook Reels are already a blatant copy. And YouTube Shorts is trying.
They don't want to compete with tiktok, they want them gone so they win without trying to make their own service better, which they could do, but they don't want to change what likely ends up being a more lucrative algorithm for them if they aren't dealing with competition. You know, American free market economics ๐
A thing never mentioned in these debates is that noone in the world is buying tiktok without buying the underlying algorithm, the same algorithm the app runs on worldwide, the algorithm is the special sauce. They are not going to sell the basis for their app just for a single payday in the US market, which after buying it, they could rebrand and then once successful in the US, compete in the global market against tiktok but with the income of the most lucrative app market in the world behind them. It's an extremely stupid business move.
But what if the US version becomes a different version than the rest of the world's? What if the rest of the world wants that version and demands it?
They have a leg up, they would have to use their early footing to compete. If they go, the vacuum of their loss of presence will open a spot for an american tech company to copy them. Either way, they are going to get competition from an american tech company. Nothing they are doing is esoteric in a way that would make them hard to copy. There really is no secret sauce, so to speak, in the software. If they are doing it to hide something then then it lends credence to the US's accusations, at least it leaves a grey area for that speculation. This gives the US a big avenue to push that they are right and everyone should be cautious of their media business.
Then they change it to match.
How does that work? 1 app 2 companies. Who will follow whom?