
‘Content network effect’ makes TikTok tough to copy - rbanffy
https://techcrunch.com/2020/04/01/content-network-effect/
======
danShumway
Someone like Cory Doctorow would argue that this barrier to unseating
established, content-heavy networks would go away if competitors were able to
freely and legally build their own interops with TikTok's services.

If a 3rd-party app allowed users to cross-post to TikTok, or even to import
their feed from TikTok and respond to posts without leaving the app -- the
network effect would look a lot less intimidating.

This article focuses purely on the question of, "how could established
networks with lots of content leverage that content to try and catch up?" But
TikTok's network only matters because that network is surrounded by a legal
wall.

Allow competitors to bypass that wall, and then TikTok will be forced to
compete with its UX, privacy policies, client features, and advertising -- not
by holding your friends hostage from you.

~~~
nemothekid
> _Someone like Cory Doctorow would argue that this barrier to unseating
> established, content-heavy networks would go away if competitors were able
> to freely and legally build their own interops with TikTok 's services._

Do you have a link to a specific article where he said that? I'm struggling to
understand how that is true.

1\. For content networks (YouTube, Netflix, TikTok), video bandwidth is the
highest cost and it isn't cheap. Why would anyone effectively pay their
competitors for the privilege of hosting their content? That is the number one
reason why we don't see competitors to YouTube.

2\. > _UX, privacy policies, client features, and advertising -- not by
holding your friends hostage from you_

TikTok does compete - they pay for content. They learned the lesson Twitter
refused to acknowledge with Vine, the facebook has been dragging its feet
trying to adopt, that was invented by YouTube and abused by Netflix. You need
to pay for content to bring video creators to your platform. Now, again, if
I'm TikTok, why would I pay for creators for content to be shown on a
competitors platform. Worse still why would I pay for content that I can no
longer accurately measure the reach of, and deal with a 10x worse fraud
problem?

Simply put, I see no reason why TikTok should be forced to socialize their
platform so that third parties can leech of their content and video
infrastructure for free. If competitors want to compete they should compete on
talent and pay creators, everything else is secondary.

~~~
ryukafalz
> Do you have a link to a specific article where he said that? I'm struggling
> to understand how that is true.

Sure, here’s one: [https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/02/gopher-when-
adversaria...](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/02/gopher-when-adversarial-
interoperability-burrowed-under-gatekeepers-fortresses)

>Today's tech giants—and both their apologists and their critics—insist that
their dominance is the inevitable consequence of "network effects," and so
nothing we do will recapture the diversity that once defined the Internet. But
adversarial interoperability is judo for network effects.

------
pjc50
Can't believe Twitter killed Vine rather than negotiate with the content
creators.

~~~
swampthinker
It's truly comical how bad Twitter is at managing it's acquisitions. Time and
time again, they get the initial idea right, then squander it.

------
appleshore
Here’s a decent comparison between Triller and TikTok-

[https://medium.com/the-dopamine-effect/triller-vs-tiktok-
dif...](https://medium.com/the-dopamine-effect/triller-vs-tiktok-differences-
similarities-and-why-you-need-to-know-about-both-526b91f55deb)

Triller has 27 million users in the US but never heard anyone talk about it.

~~~
stevewodil
Never heard of Triller. TikTok can't be competed with because it's already too
big. Try competing with Facebook by creating an app that does basically the
same thing, you will almost certainly fail to become bigger than Facebook
(obviously).

Byte tried it, and hasn't seen good growth at all. TikTok has too much money
to spend on advertising, and too many users that they've already won.
Competing with a similar app is just dumb at this point, move on to something
else.

------
oceliker
This article has a font change after the (likely copy pasted) description of
network effect. All the more reason to love plain text...

------
baxtr
I have used TikTok extensively and I have not seen many of the remixes. That’s
why the whole story sounds a bit made up to me. If you’re saying TikTok is
great because it has lots of people on board that create fun videos daily.
Fine. But why give that phenomenon a new name? It’s similar to YouTube’s
success. Why should I ever use any other app/site if I get what I want on
TikTok/YT?

~~~
swiley
TikTok managed to build something that requires less attention and focus than
YouTube (I can't believe that's real now that I'm saying it.) If you're
wondering how it would improve your life then the answer is: it wont and it's
probably not meant for you.

------
mlindner
The privacy implications of TikTok are like Facebook but even worse in every
way. If you hate Facebook and refuse to use it but use TikTok you're simply
being a hypocrite.

~~~
xster
Does TikTok track you on non-TikTok properties all across the internet?

~~~
elboru
Facebook didn't start tracking everyone all across the internet either.

------
dman
TikTok is distributing some incredibly dangerous material during this pandemic
- people claiming in tiktok videos their religious faith makes them immune to
the virus and showing a Corona infected person hugging others with messages
like - "No virus is going to prevent me from loving my fellow human being".
This isnt a oneoff video, there are a whole bunch of them and they are going
viral. Completely at a loss at how to contain the spread of this dangerous
information during a pandemic.

PS: I am consciously choosing to not post a link to any of those videos here
to prevent them from going even more viral.

~~~
cameronbrown
Is there "dangerous information" or only stupid people? Sometimes I worry
focusing on the former is actually dangerous, because it ignores why people
aren't capable of critical thinking in the first place.

~~~
threeseed
No there is absolutely dangerous information.

There are people today, even President Trump, touting unproven drugs as a cure
for COVID-19. People based on this information then do stupid things like (a)
die from ingesting pool chemicals with a similar name or (b) hoarding large
quantities for profit. Or look at the irrationality around toilet paper.

Most people in this situation aren't stupid. They are ignorant. And as such
they rely on authorities and experts to provide accurate and safe information.

~~~
robocat
> look at the irrationality around toilet paper

I think it is perfectly rational to buy a bit more than you need if you think
“irrational” people are buying more than they need. Low cost, low risk, so why
wouldn’t you? Expecting everybody to act rationally is highly irrational IMHO.

It’s probably a both defect in game theory?

~~~
celticninja
It is rational to act irrationally if others are acting irrationally.

------
adaisadais
Recently finished “Civilization: The West and the Rest” by Niall Ferguson.
Ferguson argues that competition, science, the rule of law, modern medicine,
consumerism, and western-Protestant work ethic allowed the West to make
“advancements” while others “stagnated”. (1)

In the section on consumerism he talks about how the USSR in many ways was
equal or stronger than US or other western countries but couldn’t seem to make
a single decent pair of blue jeans.

The Chinese government has made some incredible strides and has taken note of
the many things that the west did right and the west did wrong. I believe
TikTok is one of the best ways China has been able to study western culture.
It won’t be long before it will be the East and the rest. And the west gave
most of it away for free.

(1)
[https://archive.org/details/civilizationwest00ferg](https://archive.org/details/civilizationwest00ferg)

~~~
ahelwer
Any book purporting to explain why the west was so successful without
including the practices of colonialism is just utterly without merit, sorry.
Enormous transfer of wealth and resources from the rest of the world are very
handy.

~~~
fastball
Somewhat of a chicken-and-egg problem. If the West was successful due to
colonization, how is it that the West became the colonizers in the first
place, and not the colonized?

~~~
pjc50
"Guns, Germs, and Steel" has a go at explaining this.

The role of germs should not be underestimated; the pandemics the colonizers
brought and spread (in some cases deliberately) killed far more than the guns.
Thus offering the illusion that there was empty space for the taking.

~~~
fastball
But the reason that Europe had germs is because Europe had dense cities for
far longer than the places they were colonizing.

