TikTok is now the most popular website

ahalpert said:
These sites rise to prominence by delivering a quality service. They operate essentially at a loss until they establish a monopoly-like grip on the market. Then they lower the quality of their service, which sucks for their customers and their partners. It's a big deal because by this point they are so large and entrenched that their behavior affects the entire marketplace. If they weren't so big, nobody would be writing about this.

So basically, the Tik Tok you have come to love will not exist in 4 years. It will be similar, but it won't make you as happy and it will cheat the people who make content for it. And it will be so big that it affects everyone.

The point about ads on amazon is that the products you find are ads themselves. And, of course, many of the reviews are fake. So basically, you could be spending the same or less money on a product that better suits your needs. But you're never going to find it. And it's next to impossible for that product's seller to successfully launch their product independent of amazon.

Your failure to grasp the significance of this and how the economy has changed with each new monopoly says more about you than it does about the economy.

Anybody who thinks that the way things are now is the way they'll always be reminds me of people who couldn't imagine an America without slavery.
Click to expand...

Dude, what hypothetical products am I not going to find that better suit my needs? I find everything I possibly need for a few dollars for each item. The ads actually sometimes recommend me things that are a better fit, or a nice change of pace.

Like what are you saying, bro???

And I do not care about the new seller who is trying to launch their business but can't because there are 10,000 others doing the same thing and he or she is buried. Tough luck, no one said life is easy.

Same with TikTok...4 years from now? Are you out of your mind? You don't even use it! I've been entertained by TikTok for the last 5-6-7 years. If it folds tomorrow, I'M GOOD. I will move on to the next thing.

The reality is both improved quality of life for millions and the only people writing about this are those with nothing else to do (or the ones taking action).

My god, your failure to understand how business and entertainment have changed is astonishing. If Amazon and TikTok end tomorrow, something else will replace them and the same thing will happen again.
 
NorBro said:
Dude, what hypothetical products am I not going to find that better suit my needs? I find everything I possibly need for a few dollars for each item. The ads actually sometimes recommend me things that are a better fit, or a nice change of pace.
Click to expand...

I cant help you understand this. I'm sorry. I tried. Ignorance is bliss.

Same with TikTok...4 years from now? Are you out of your mind? You don't even use it! I've been entertained by TikTok for the last 5-6-7 years. If it folds tomorrow, I'M GOOD. I will move on to the next thing.
Click to expand...

This is one of the funniest and most revealing things you've ever posted. Obviously, it's not true or you wouldn't be talking about how Tik Tok has consumed your viewing habits.

It's a very ephemeral mindset that attaches no special value to anything, presumably because there's no deeper meaning to what you watch and think. But that doesn't make it true.

Out if curiosity, how would you react if the NFL folded tomorrow? Would you move on to watching soccer and be just as happy?

If Star Trek or Netflix or YouTube disappeared from the internet tomorrow, I would be materially impacted and there would be no direct replacements. That's precisely why I value them.

What if the internet itself collapsed? You're good?

Photographers talk about this with Instagram all the time -- how it's no longer geared towards sharing photography but there's no comparable replacement because the alternatives lack the same features and reach.
 
DLD said:
The DOJ doesn't even define what a monopoly is. Because, even though Google and its subsidiary YouTube may violate the terms of its content creators contracts, they ain't a monopoly.
Click to expand...

From Politico's article - https://www.politico.com/news/2023/0...oogle-00079229

“The analogy would be if Goldman [Sachs] or Citibank owned the New York Stock Exchange,” Jonathan Kanter, head of the DOJ’s antitrust division said Tuesday at a press conference.
Click to expand...
 
ahalpert said:
I cant help you understand this. I'm sorry. I tried. Ignorance is bliss.
Click to expand...

Because you're a terrible teacher, Abe.

You author a bunch of twisting, speculative syntax with theoretical outcomes and then make a slavery reference (twice) when I don't understand you.

You repeat stuff you hear on the Internet without elaborating with your own experiences.

As I understand it, you're saying Amazon's search results are modified and controlled, and I shared with you that it doesn't affect me and I'm not concerned it affects others who are trying to sell on their platform.

If there is more then you'll have to try a little harder.

ahalpert said:
This is one of the funniest and most revealing things you've ever posted. Obviously, it's not true or you wouldn't be talking about how Tik Tok has consumed your viewing habits.

It's a very ephemeral mindset that attaches no special value to anything, presumably because there's no deeper meaning to what you watch and think. But that doesn't make it true.

Out if curiosity, how would you react if the NFL folded tomorrow? Would you move on to watching soccer and be just as happy?

If Star Trek or Netflix or YouTube disappeared from the internet tomorrow, I would be materially impacted and there would be no direct replacements. That's precisely why I value them.

What if the internet itself collapsed? You're good?

Photographers talk about this with Instagram all the time -- how it's no longer geared towards sharing photography but there's no comparable replacement because the alternatives lack the same features and reach.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's that funny or revealing, but OKAY, I'm with it.

TikTok doesn't consume my viewing habits; I said it entertained me. But YouTube consumes me. For the last 20 years. And I would be majorly upset if YouTube, or the NFL, folded tomorrow. But we are not discussing YouTube or the NFL.

But do you know how many times YouTube has changed in 20 years? How many videos there are of content creators upset, crying on camera about changing algorithms, canceled ad revenues, adjusted monetization. Or how absolutely annoying AF the NFL has become with marketing and business relationships with practically everything they come across?

But they are still around because businesses/services change and people adapt.
 
NorBro said:
But do you know how many times YouTube has changed in 20 years? How many videos there are of content creators upset, crying on camera about changing algorithms, canceled ad revenues, adjusted monetization. Or how absolutely annoying AF the NFL has become with marketing and business relationships with practically everything they come across?
Click to expand...

That's my biggest beef with YouTube, which includes channel throttling. And that's where the DOJ protects them. As well as the old Twitter and Facebook.

But it's not Google's fault that Bing and Yahoo couldn't match them.
 
It's always been difficult for me to understand any criticism about how these larger businesses should run their companies.

What are they supposed to do? They manage millions of users and billions/trillions of photos/videos/products...how TF are you supposed to run your company properly to make everyone happy.

It is an impossible task.

And I would definitely watch soccer if the United States put more effort into making it more of a normal sport and not airing it on weird channels at weird times.

[I am a runner so I really appreciate soccer's running.]
 
NorBro said:
I rounded, lol.
it will be 18 years on April 23 if we're going by the first video uploaded.
Click to expand...

I was making the point that YT, FB etc are all still very new but have completely changed the way the world works.
However
Thanks to YouTube I can "prove" the world is flat (do NOT go down that rabbit hole, it is hours you will never get back.. :-) )
Thanks to Twitter I can "Prove" the 2020 US Election was "stolen" (despite the courts proving otherwise)
thanks to TikTok you can see me dance (and the Chinese State Security get my metadata that the NSA wants)
Thanks to Instagram you can see what I had for breakfast (how can you live without that knowledge)
Thanks to Facebook we can hound anyone to suicide.....

I am beginning to think that Tyler in Fight Club had the right idea, just the wrong targets.
 
NorBro said:
It's always been difficult for me to understand any criticism about how these larger businesses should run their companies.
Click to expand...

That's exactly it. You don't understand why monopolies are bad.

These criticisms arise because these companies have the power to fix prices and stifle competition. We have laws to prevent this from happening because it's bad for the economy. All the magic of the free market dies under monopolies because it's no longer a free market.

Sure, you think you're buying the best products available on Amazon using your search terms. That's the beauty of it.

You're not following the slavery analogy, which isn't that surprising because people in this day and age often struggle with analogies. The point is not that slavery was bad. The point is that it was an entrenched economic system that persisted for hundreds of years and was the epitome of the principle that you consider indefatigable: "Some things seem too big and powerful and untouchable." That's why it's similar to what we were discussing. Like you think monopolies are unstoppable, there were people back then who thought slavery would last forever.

It took a war to end slavery. We already have laws and precedents to prevent the rent-seeking behavior of monopolistic corporations. This isn't a struggle. It's a lay-up.
 
JAMedia said:
I was making the point that YT, FB etc are all still very new but have completely changed the way the world works.
However
Thanks to YouTube I can "prove" the world is flat (do NOT go down that rabbit hole, it is hours you will never get back.. :-) )
Thanks to Twitter I can "Prove" the 2020 US Election was "stolen" (despite the courts proving otherwise)
thanks to TikTok you can see me dance (and the Chinese State Security get my metadata that the NSA wants)
Thanks to Instagram you can see what I had for breakfast (how can you live without that knowledge)
Thanks to Facebook we can hound anyone to suicide.....

I am beginning to think that Tyler in Fight Club had the right idea, just the wrong targets.
Click to expand...

That all sounds about right to me, ha.

Making information instantly available to anyone at all times is good and bad. Because of how humans are, there was no other outcome. People will forever naturally agree and disagree, conflict.

Whether it's info through ink and paper, or airwaves, or screens, or, soon, telepathic brain messages...it's all the same result; information, misinformation, conflicts, jealousy, problem solving, problem creating.
 
JAMedia said:
I was making the point that YT, FB etc are all still very new but have completely changed the way the world works.
However
Thanks to YouTube I can "prove" the world is flat (do NOT go down that rabbit hole, it is hours you will never get back.. :-) )
Thanks to Twitter I can "Prove" the 2020 US Election was "stolen" (despite the courts proving otherwise)
thanks to TikTok you can see me dance (and the Chinese State Security get my metadata that the NSA wants)
Thanks to Instagram you can see what I had for breakfast (how can you live without that knowledge)
Thanks to Facebook we can hound anyone to suicide.....

I am beginning to think that Tyler in Fight Club had the right idea, just the wrong targets.
Click to expand...

I read recently that YouTube was the only social media platform that had a positive rather than a negative effect on people's mental health. I think that's because it's a bit more oriented around information and less around socialization. I probably read it in this article or another like it: https://www.psychalive.org/worst-mental-health-instagram-facebook-youtube/

Instagram was found to have the most negative overall effect on young people’s mental health. The popular photo sharing app negatively impacts body image and sleep, increases bullying and “FOMO” (fear of missing out), and leads to greater feelings of anxiety, depression, and loneliness...

Facebook was found to have similar negative effects to Instagram...

The one social network that stood out from the rest as having an overall positive effect on mental health was YouTube. The video streaming platform scored very high in categories like awareness, self-expression, and community building. YouTube was also the only social network where anxiety, depression, and loneliness lessened with use. Many YouTubers actively try to create an online community where users can support one another. However, a major downside to YouTube was that it has the most negative effect on sleep.
Click to expand...

I like Twitter but I have to use it carefully. It's really easy to get sucked into reading crazy opinions and having endless arguments with people whose minds are made up. But some of the info I learn on there I can't learn anywhere else. So, with adequate filtering of who I'm reading, it's a net positive.
 
ahalpert said:
That's exactly it. You don't understand why monopolies are bad.

These criticisms arise because these companies have the power to fix prices and stifle competition. We have laws to prevent this from happening because it's bad for the economy. All the magic of the free market dies under monopolies because it's no longer a free market.

Sure, you think you're buying the best products available on Amazon using your search terms. That's the beauty of it.

You're not following the slavery analogy, which isn't that surprising because people in this day and age often struggle with analogies. The point is not that slavery was bad. The point is that it was an entrenched economic system that persisted for hundreds of years and was the epitome of the principle that you consider indefatigable: "Some things seem too big and powerful and untouchable." That's why it's similar to what we were discussing. Like you think monopolies are unstoppable, there were people back then who thought slavery would last forever.

It took a war to end slavery. We already have laws and precedents to prevent the rent-seeking behavior of monopolistic corporations. This isn't a struggle. It's a lay-up.
Click to expand...

But you're having trouble understanding that there is no free market anymore. If it's not one "monopoly" then it will be another.

I'm sorry, but your analogy is irrelevant and distasteful. My feelings towards how Amazon or TikTok should run their companies cannot be correlated.
 
NorBro said:
But you're having trouble understanding that there is no free market anymore.
Click to expand...

There were worse monopolies a hundred years ago, and they got broken up. Come on, NorBro...

The slavery analogy is useful because nowadays it's impossible to imagine the US legalizing slavery. Back then, it was impossible to imagine the US banning it. Times change.

If you're saying that you accept that Tik Tok might decline in quality, and that you consider it a zeitgeist or a fad and there will be other fads in the future, then that's fine. I just don't want to live in a world where all my media/shopping options suck because none of them faces meaningful competition. And it costs us. You and I are financially poorer today because of what Google and others have done.
 
But the world was different one hundred years ago, man, people were different, the money was different. Come onnnnn, you know that.

Okay, listen, no hard feelings - & per usual, just chatting - but I think we are way off in our life views. And that's totally okay.

We can still chat Canon vs. Sony.
 
NorBro said:
And I would definitely watch soccer if the United States put more effort into making it more of a normal sport and not airing it on weird channels at weird times.

[I am a runner so I really appreciate soccer's running.]
Click to expand...

Speaking of monopolies, FIFA is one and they exclusively license the national federations, of which USSF is one. And the USSF loves FIFA. Because it doesn't insist on the OTA availability of its matches.

Oh, and there are no no monopolies. The only monopoly is the state.
 
DLD said:
Speaking of monopolies, FIFA is one and they exclusively license the national federations, of which USSF is one. And the USSF loves FIFA. Because it doesn't insist on the OTA availability of its matches.

Oh, and there are no no monopolies. The only monopoly is the state.
Click to expand...

FIFA has quite the history, don't they, DLD? I bet you can talk about them...you love them, right? :grin:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top