mchclark.bsky.social
@mchclark.bsky.social
That is clearly a Doodlewok
September 13, 2025 at 6:59 PM
@apnews.com maybe include one sentence on WHY she dismissed the case?
September 9, 2025 at 2:43 PM
Google says wheel bug
May 14, 2025 at 12:48 AM
Ducking cute!
April 10, 2025 at 8:38 PM
Ketchup, they were asking ketchup.
February 25, 2025 at 1:41 AM
If you read some of her late tweets she walks back the go-dark part. There was a mandate to remove gender identity-related content.
January 31, 2025 at 11:59 PM
I showed this to my dog, she is now hiding in the closet.
January 25, 2025 at 5:42 PM
No but it didn't leave the play store for about an hour or so after it went dark. Might just be "processing" time to get it back up .
January 19, 2025 at 9:31 PM
Also, appreciate the civil discussion on this. Nice to have a disagreement with out the silly name-calling etc.
January 19, 2025 at 9:01 PM
I haven't seen anything that says TikTok has anymore access than any other app. If the concern is the Chinese ownership then shouldn't TEMU and all other Chinese apps be gone? Since they aren't, this really seems like either an effort to abridge speech or backdoor influence from Meta, X or the like.
January 19, 2025 at 8:59 PM
You don't have concerns about the US government effectively banning a free speech platform? I truly see this as a modern day version of banning a newspaper. Even at the height of the cold war Pravada was never banned in the US.
January 19, 2025 at 5:52 PM
I think gumbo fits more in the stew category than soup but also a pretty strong argument that gumbo is just it's own thing
January 19, 2025 at 5:46 PM
You are so close to understanding how this app works. Here I'll help you out, read my post in the context that it was a reply to Henry post.
January 19, 2025 at 12:18 PM
Do you have any idea of how this app works and that my comment is a reply to Henry?
January 18, 2025 at 9:02 PM
Wow, original poster blocked me. Didn't think I said anything wrong.
January 18, 2025 at 4:27 PM
The 1st amendment only protects from the government surpressing or limiting speech, not an individual company.
January 18, 2025 at 4:21 PM
Social media is clearly protected by the first amendment The government has no business banning a company that ro idea it. Image in the olden days, if this was about banning the printing press. Clearly different tech but same effect of making it more difficult for a person to be heard.
January 18, 2025 at 4:19 PM
And how does being owned by an American company change that...see X, Meta etc.
January 18, 2025 at 2:07 AM
Like what? There hasn't even been a hint or partial leak of what the threat actually is.
January 18, 2025 at 1:52 AM
That isn't his argument. He is questioning why ByteDance won't sell and alluding it means something other than a rational business decision to just exit an unfriendly marker.
January 18, 2025 at 1:50 AM
The industry isn't really relevant to the argument of why ByteDance won't sell. No company, in any industry, is going to sell because a foreign govt wants them to be controlled by a domestic company. The real suspicious part is the US hasn't even hinted at what the national security threat is.
January 18, 2025 at 1:47 AM
Your statement is silly, what would an American company do if China said they had to sell a huge part of their business to a Chinese company? They would promptly tell China to GTFO, exact what ByteDance is doing by not selling.
January 18, 2025 at 1:37 AM
Given that this was written by a doctor it must be true.
December 19, 2024 at 7:21 PM
If you blacked out the word drones and Jersey the statement seems like it could be applied to a million topics right now.
December 15, 2024 at 1:33 PM