A New Bid for TikTok from Perplexity AI Would Give the US Government a 50% Stake (apnews.com) 109
An anonymous reader shared this report from the Associated Press:
Perplexity AI has presented a new proposal to TikTok's parent company that would allow the U.S. government to own up to 50% of a new entity that merges Perplexity with TikTok's U.S. business, according to a person familiar with the matter... The new proposal would allow the U.S. government to own up to half of that new structure once it makes an initial public offering of at least $300 billion, said the person, who was not authorized to speak about the proposal. The person said Perplexity's proposal was revised based off of feedback from the Trump administration. If the plan is successful, the shares owned by the government would not have voting power, the person said. The government also would not get a seat on the new company's board.
Under the plan, ByteDance would not have to completely cut ties with TikTok, a favorable outcome for its investors. But it would have to allow a "full U.S. board control," the person said.
Under the proposal, the China-based tech company would contribute TikTok's U.S. business without the proprietary algorithm that fuels what users see on the app, according to a document seen by the Associated Press.
Under the plan, ByteDance would not have to completely cut ties with TikTok, a favorable outcome for its investors. But it would have to allow a "full U.S. board control," the person said.
Under the proposal, the China-based tech company would contribute TikTok's U.S. business without the proprietary algorithm that fuels what users see on the app, according to a document seen by the Associated Press.
What could possibly go wrong? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
You are right, none those folks did this ... you fucking Klan robe wearing Nazi.
Re:What could possibly go wrong? (Score:5, Insightful)
My guess, purely speculation on my part, is that the Nazis had not been viewed with quite as much hatred in South Africa when Elon was growing up as they were in America, and Elon didn't quite understand that a Nazi salute would taken so seriously in the US.
My guess is that he's become, for all intents and purposes, an actual Nazi, based on a well-established pattern of behavior going back years now, and he's just being a little more open about it recently. Once he endorsed the AfD in Germany, there should be no more surprises in store. That's as close as you can get to supporting the original Nazi party of Hitler without a time machine. So his Nazi salutes repeated for emphasis and clarity didn't raise an eyebrow for me, neither did his appearances with the AfD repeating neo-nazi horseshit ideas. My reaction would be the same if tomorrow I saw news that he was seen goose-stepping around in a SS uniform and chanting Nazi slogans.
Re:What could possibly go wrong? (Score:5, Insightful)
It was a Nazi salute.
https://www.threads.net/@darsb... [threads.net]
Literally a direct motion for motion copy of how Hitler did it.
This is a guy who's been promoting neo-Nazi groups across Europe even if you don't want to admit what Maga is. Why the fuck would you think he's not doing a Nazi salute? Read the room.
Re: (Score:2)
You were going great until you said "read the room," which weakens your point by implying social conformity is a required step in calling out nazis.
Re:What could possibly go wrong? (Score:5, Informative)
The Nazis are a golden standard of social conformity, darling.
And the fact that literally all you Nazis rejoiced at the gesture, as well as the fact that it was directed at your room, tells us all we need to know.
The rest of the world, consisting of all other kinds of people, agreed it was a Nazi salute despite our other differences, because we know one when we see one.
Re: (Score:1)
The "Nazi salut" is actually an old roman salute.
A pity the Nazis stole it and in Germany for example it now a forbidden "gesture".
On the other hand, I pity stupid neo Nazi more ... as they do not really know who and what they are defaming.
Re: (Score:2)
I pity stupid neo Nazi more
I've got no pity for Nazis, neo- or otherwise. They chose hate.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm talking about the room Musk is in for what little it's worth. As in "Look at the context".
But yes, clumsy use of the phrase and I could have worded that better.
Re: (Score:2)
It was a Nazi salute.
The Jewish Anti-Defamation League would disagree with you. They flat out said it was an awkward gesture, but not a Nazi Salute.
https://x.com/ADL/status/18814... [x.com]
Re: (Score:2)
The ADL claimed this early on (I've seen the screenshots of the link you posted - no, I'm not visiting that fucking website.) The information that's come out since has proven they were completely wrong. It is not clear they would disagree with me right now, and even if they did, they would have moved from being wrong to actively lying given the evidence.
My guess is the ADL doesn't want Jews added to the list of enemies of the current administration, which is fair but maybe they should just shut up rather th
We've already seen how this one ends (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
The fuck...
This disinformation campaign was advanced by National Institutes of Health head Francis Collins and NIAID’s Anthony Fauci, who oversaw the U.S. government’s response to COVID. Emails made available show that at least two leading researchers told Collins and Fauci in February 2020 that a lab leak was possible and likely. Collins and Fauci publicly dismissed the lab leak theory as a conspiracy theory even though they knew it wasn’t, perhaps for fear of harming cooperation between the U.S. and China or of being implicated in the pandemic since Fauci was instrumental in offshoring this research to Wuhan after Obama banned it on U.S. soil
That...actually happened? A few days back I had one of those moments where I let out a quiet groan when I read that Trump was wanting to prosecute Fauci. But shit...ok, maybe he's got reasons after all. Yet another reason why I fucking hate politics. And why the fuck would that be banned on US soil? That makes no sense, but...yep...
https://www.science.org/conten... [science.org]
Despite that infectious disease experts had already known that something like COVID was inevitable. So why the fuck would we put that
Re: (Score:2)
so you listened to the Trey Gawdy hearings....the ones where he later admitted they only held them to kneecap Hilary.
The only reason la Presidenta wanted to go after Fauci was because Fauci peed all over his hyrdoxychlorquine claims as well as all the rest he sputttered incoherently about to the press.
Re: We've already seen how this one ends (Score:2)
What are you even talking about? Gowdy quit politics four years before this was even published. Did you read the document? I don't know who Michael Shellenberger is, but whoever he is, he did his homework. The document is pretty well cited.
Hmm.... (Score:2)
This is starting to look like a bunch of carrion eaters fighting over a carcass.
So... China still gets access to all the data? (Score:4, Insightful)
50% ownership, none of the voting rights, and the Bad Guys (tm) still have full access to all of the precious data. What exactly is the point again?
Re: (Score:2)
I think the idea would be to put an embargo on data transfers to the holding company ByteDance used in Singapore to move data to the CCP. If Perplexity and the Feds had enough shares between them, they could effectively enforce this dictate. Later on the Feds could dump their shares on any American party willing to maintain that stance.
Also the algo would need to be tweaked to stop propagandizing for the CCP etc.
Re: (Score:3)
Ah yes, the "it's bad when they do it, but good when we do it" distinction.
Meanwhile, as the still-not-entirely-scoped Salt Typhoon hack has demonstrated, the problem is the fundamental _capability_ for data collection and exfiltration.
Re: (Score:2)
False equivalence. The CCP isn't just some nation state, they are genocidal monsters with a death toll so massive it makes the Nazi death camps look like the school nurse and that is the least of their crimes against just their own people. And they are expansionist, they want to bring their flavor of nightmare to your home soon.
Re: So... China still gets access to all the data? (Score:1)
Bollocks.
Re: (Score:2)
Mao's "Great Leap Forward" policies caused the Great Chinese Famine [wikipedia.org], which resulted in 15 to 55 million deaths. In sheer death count, it's much worse than their other genocidal campaigns, such as the repression of Uyghurs.
And they are definitely expansionist: going back to the annexation of Tibet (just two years after the Communists consolidated control over most of the mainland China) all the way to their aggressive posturing and artificial islands [csis.org], they are definitely expansionist.
Exactly what did you ta
Re: (Score:2)
"a death toll so massive it makes the Nazi death camps look like the school nurse"
Nazi holocaust is estimated to have killed 2.6 million people. You are crediting the Nazi's with every death in WW2. You are also only looking at Mao's Great leap forward and failing to account for the death toll in Hong Kong, Tibet, concentration camps, and however many dissendents they murder and torture on an ongoing basis. The CCP is little different from the Nazi's except they that they are an ongoing affair and instead o
Re: (Score:2)
"The Uyghurs are not oppressed. They live in their own:"
Try concentration camps. They are slaves who labor pending selection for organ donation. The CCP was literally convincted, with mountains of evidence, by an international tribunal in London.
"Can not be so hard to read a fucking history book. And actually read the chapters and not just the headlines."
You should try doing that outside of China.
"And idiots like you pretend it was intentional. As it simply was a stupid mistake. Same mistake happened in Cam
Re: (Score:3)
False equivalence. The CCP isn't just some nation state, they are genocidal monsters with a death toll so massive it makes the Nazi death camps look like the school nurse and that is the least of their crimes against just their own people.
You know the 2nd Trump Administration is only a week old. Give them time. And a shout-out - I mean, salute - to Elon ...
And they are expansionist, they want to bring their flavor of nightmare to your home soon.
Greenland and Panama would like to have a chat w/you ...
[Yes, hopefully, I'm being hyperbolic.]
Re: (Score:2)
Wait. You are saying the US , which hasn't been in a period of peace since the second world war and is currently threatening 4 different allies with invasion isn't expansionist, whereas China who hasn't been in a war (a few border shootouts really) since 1979 and whos only territorial claims have been on territories that historically actually did belong to them, ARE expansionist?
Re: (Score:2)
Every single detail of your comment is dishonest and misleading.
Re: (Score:2)
However, historical possession of land doesn't imply future possession rights.
The land now consisting of the sovereign State of Ukraine was a part of Russia for many hundreds of years. That doesn't mean Russia has some right to it now.
Re: (Score:2)
This is another one of those common themes among socialist/fascist authoritarians. Germany made the same 'historically ours' excuse for it's early invasions.
Re: (Score:2)
Britain and France fought a fucking 100 year war over a historical possession.
The fact that authoritarian and fascist leaders have also used that excuse doesn't mean shit- they would have used any excuse. That was just the low-hanging fruit.
Re: (Score:2)
"Quit trying to peddle your political bullshit amonst people with an IQ above 35."
Don't worry. There's no sign of anyone but you having seen it yet today so we are well within threshold!
Re: (Score:2)
What even fucking brings you back here, dude? I've never seen you be anything but ridiculed on this site for being a moron.
Re: (Score:2)
There are no morons you idiot. Eugenics was and is bullshit along with the rest of the ideas you and the mass murdering regimes you support push. I hate to break it to you, you weren't born brighter than anyone and as it happens you don't seem to made much of the opportunities to nurture and develop your mind since.
"What even fucking brings you back here, dude?"
I don't go there often but are you, a n00b with an ego scaled inversely to his intellect and sequentially assigned UID of a MILLION seriously trying
Re: (Score:2)
One problem at a time.
Re: (Score:2)
50% ownership, none of the voting rights, and the Bad Guys (tm) still have full access to all of the precious data. What exactly is the point again?
False, they lose all access to the data, but they're not banned from investing in the new entity.
Re: (Score:2)
Pray tell, how is this "losing access to the data" to be enforced?
The same way that CAELA was supposed to be restricted to "legitimate" domestic law enforcement?
Re: (Score:1)
The point is that 99% of the people talking about shares as in stocks: do not know that shares/stocks without voting rights exist.
Perhaps this is the case in this example, too?
Re: (Score:2)
Easing Americans into fascism.
50%? (Score:4, Insightful)
I am all for trying to sell TikTok instead of just banning it and letting it die.
However, I don't understand this whole "50% government ownership" crap. That isn't the way things are supposed to work in the USA. Government control/ownership over business is way more of a China/CCP thing, which is exactly why TikTok was going to be banned.
Re:50%? (Score:5, Insightful)
That isn't the way things are supposed to work in the USA
That's the way things are supposed to work in the USA *now*.
What could possibly go wrong with government owned and controlled media?
Re: (Score:2)
>"What could possibly go wrong with government owned and controlled media?"
Everything, of course.
But, most of the media *has* been in bed with government for quite a few years at this point.
Re: (Score:2)
This provides literally no control, it is a passive financial only ownership stake with no voting rights or board seat.
Re: (Score:2)
What could possibly go wrong with government owned and controlled media?
I got modded down when I made similar comments about BBC, CBC, and ABC. The idea of state media has never sat well with me. Socialists think it works well...until the government turns against them. Though at the time, I'm pretty sure those who down-modded me took solace in the fact that their guy was in office and just assumed that it would always be that way.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'd say just the general confluence of nationalized industry and socialism, and the fact that the Conservatives of the UK are very socialist.
Not that I see anything wrong with either of those things.
Re: (Score:2)
the Conservatives of the UK are very socialist.
They are decidedly right of centre and always have been.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
>"Right of the UK's center, which is very much socialist, and always has been ;)"
Indeed. UK's "conservative" party on the USA scale is left of center. Of course, a one-dimensional scale of a political party (left/right) is a little silly, since things are far more complicated than that.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, a one-dimensional scale of a political party (left/right) is a little silly
More than a little, really. It's fucking ridiculous.
But when arguing with someone, I find it's less confusing for them if you speak their language.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But it's frankly a fact, that the Conservative Party of the UK has many very socialist aspects. That's because Europe does, in general.
Perhaps in Europe they no longer consider those aspects "Socialist", perhaps just "Normal", but they are, regardless, and normal or not.
Re: 50%? (Score:2)
In that context, I'm speaking of e.g. Cuba, maoist China, the old USSR, etc. The so called revolutionaries wanted everything government owned and controlled, and well...that's what they got.
I can't think of any other reason to mod down that comment I made. I'd have to find it, but it was really short, something to the effect of media being taxpayer funded smells of state media. I think this was around the time Russia first invaded Ukraine, and what was going on at the time were discussions around how Russia
Re: (Score:2)
Reply to self:
Doing more research, I am not sure this summary/article is correctly interpreting what was meant by "50% USA ownership", it very well could be "50% USA corporate ownership." Even so, shouldn't it be 51+% ownership?
Re: (Score:3)
Oh no it’s completely different when republicans do it.
Like Reagan getting rid of open carry in California and granting amnesty for illegals.
Re: (Score:2)
It does seem odd. Why pay money for an actual stake when FISA court orders are free (and secret)?
Re: (Score:2)
It's a passive financial only ownership with no control. The government is creating the value by setting a deal that will let it exist. Most likely they'll turn around and divest it to pay for something that otherwise would have cost tax dollars or reduce the debt, etc.
Re: (Score:2)
We are ok with it being state media as long as it is our state, apparently.
Re: (Score:2)
Government control/ownership over business is way more of a China/CCP thing
Well technically, the CCP is the government. Their citizens don't have any say. In the US the citizens are the government via elected representatives. So not the same at all actually.
Re: (Score:2)
China is a seriously devolved democracy, but it is a democracy.
It has a legislature (though the standard rule by Supreme Council bullshit that the vanguard party-ists are so fond of) and the legislature does have power (though constrained), and as long as you are in the Party, or an approved party, you get to vote.
So while I don't want to defend that effed up form of Government, it is simply false to say that the citizens have no say.
Re: (Score:2)
They have no say in terms of the CCP has to qualify a candidate. Also, the elections as we know them are more of a local thing and do not in any way affect the national governmental body.
Re: (Score:2)
They have no say in terms of the CCP has to qualify a candidate.
You mean, they have no say if the Party says "no" to a candidate. That is true.
They must select a candidate the vanguard party agrees can run.
Also, the elections as we know them are more of a local thing and do not in any way affect the national governmental body.
Local elections in China trickle up all the way to the NPC.
Re: (Score:3)
The reason you should be against this kind of racketeering is that it has long term consequences for the US economy. When you steal people's stuff they don't tend to invest in your country any more, and if you really piss them off they'll steal your own stuff in theirs.
Re: (Score:2)
Like everything involving el Bunko, look for the trail of breadcrumbs into his pocket.
Re: (Score:1)
They won't sell. They will whine endlessly about "freedom of speech", but they will *not* give up their control over the platform, because its entire raison d'etre is narrative shaping, that's why it was created, that's what they use it for, and if they can't do that with it any more, they won't have any further use for its continued existence.
Re: (Score:2)
No (Score:1)
The government should never own stock in any company.
Letting China still have a hand is the opposite of the point of a TikTok sale.
This does nothing but give an artificial boost to lame AI company with no benefit to anyone else.
This is a troll level offer. It's insulting. This should be ignored or shot down instantly.
American Blackmail (Score:2)
We will ban you if you don't sell us the company. WTF is this shit? Back in my day we sprayed cockroaches with RAID. Now ya'll elect them.
So, a worthless purchase of a brand name? (Score:2)
Without the algorithm to addict the userbase, it's got nothing going for it.
They want to buy some users who will move on to the next big thing?
The goal for this bid is clear. Perplexity AI execs want to bump their stock with an IPO so they can cash out with a huge profit.
Re: So, a worthless purchase of a brand name? (Score:4, Interesting)
This totally reeks! Government buys majority share block in propaganda machine! They are buying the user base. Its proven now that people are too dumb to notice they are being screwed and too lazy to change apps. So there will be some attrition. Big deal. Look at Shitter. Seems to be doing pretty well for a company that is run on a quarter of the resources it used to have. Share holder value may have taken a beating but it seems to be as influential as ever
Re: (Score:3)
To be fair, this isn't an offer that includes 50% government ownership.
It's an offer allowing this company to do an IPO that won't restrict the government giving them $150B+ to buy up to 50% later on.
Re: (Score:3)
It's also a non-voting stake. Basically the government just gets a piece to auction off and use instead of tax dollars to refill social security or something.
Re: (Score:2)
We just pass a law saying the corporation makes the stake voting, or it's banned.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh? What precedent is that and given that historically you've openly and unapologetically opposed capitalism in favor of socialism; why would you care?
Re: (Score:2)
What precedent is that
Are you playing stupid?
The law we passed that banned any products made by ByteDance, by name, unless it sells.
and given that historically you've openly and unapologetically opposed capitalism in favor of socialism; why would you care?
I'm a socialist, which is not diametrically opposed to capitalism at all.
I'm also a very well paid capitalist, which certainly influences my particular viewpoint.
The fact that I believe in a strong government protecting people from the ills of capitalism does not mean, in any way, that I do not think people should be free to operate markets that aren't harmful to everyone around them.
Why would
Re: (Score:2)
"Are you playing stupid?
The law we passed that banned any products made by ByteDance, by name, unless it sells."
ByteDance, a proxy entity for a hostile foreign state which exists to engage in mass espionage against the American people and controls what amounts to critical US communications infrastructure. You are trying to say banning that behavior establishes a precedent for our own government taking controlling stakes in private corporations?
There is no reasonable equivalence between the two beyond 'somet
Re: (Score:2)
ByteDance, a proxy entity for a hostile foreign state which exists to engage in mass espionage against the American people and controls what amounts to critical US communications infrastructure.
The free market says "The American People" don't care.
Who the fuck are you to decide otherwise?
You are trying to say banning that behavior establishes a precedent for our own government taking controlling stakes in private corporations?
It establishes a precedent that we're no longer shy about passing bills to directly control the ownership structure of corporations, yes.
There is no reasonable equivalence between the two beyond 'something law, something something government, something something corporation'. The basis, purpose, and outcome would be entirely different.
Ya, bullshit. You've tipped your toe into the nationalization pool, while trying to pretend that you're against it.
It certainly is.
Wrong.
Either the state controls economic power [socialism]
Wrong.
or the private market does [capitalism].
Wrong.
The fact that you can't use definitions for words correctly means you're in no way mentally equipped to have this argument.
Re: (Score:2)
"The free market says "The American People" don't care."
Part of the Republic which stands for them decided it did care. That's part of why we have a Republic.
"It establishes a precedent that we're no longer shy about passing bills to directly control the ownership structure of corporations, yes."
You mean like the postal service and the federal reserve? Shhh. Corporations are artificial constructs which exist as a consequence of, have ownership structures defined by, and otherwise are defined and regulated e
Re: (Score:2)
Addicting a social media userbase is no great secret. But I'd like to be clear that it isn't just that hte sale doesn't include the algorithm, they'll no longer be using the chinese controlled algorithm in the US?
Re: (Score:2)
The company that is making the offer is an AI startup, so they'd be plugging a new AI addiction engine into it to replicate the experience.
Small government folks (Score:2)
Strangely silent on the matters of government owned social media.
Re: Small government folks (Score:1)
Re: Small government folks (Score:2)
Yeah, I bet Palantir is gonna be pissed.
<grin>
Hmm... (Score:2)
owning == buying (Score:2)
As if that $150 billion could be spend better on something else like some war in some small country or so.
CUBA part dos (Score:1)
So the US cut ties with Cuba because they "nationalized" businesses and took them away from rightful owners who had created, built, and developed them. 85 years later Cuba is still suffering because the US chose this.
HOW THE HELL IS THIS ANY DIFFERENT than the US nationalizing Tik Tok (or threatening its very existence) BECAUSE the company that owns it is in chYna? It it because we have the stupidest orange president ever WHO CAME UP WITH THIS PLAN in 2017 and now is pretending he can "save" a product HE
nope (Score:2)
US government should not own stock in any company. Period.
Re: (Score:2)
This is NOT government control. It's much worse. (Score:2)
This is a scheme to permit a gang of billionaires to get control of yet another opinion shaping machine at a 50% discount by using taxpayer dollars to buy half the company ownership with NONVOTING SHARES.
If it were government control there's a small chance of getting control of the government back out of the hands of these griftocrats.
Trust...not (Score:2)
And we're supposed to believe our government, especially *this* one, is better than China? Not on your life...