Topic: Central authority can be biased. Referring to TikTok - page 2. (Read 244 times)
I'm more concerned at how many people are throwing money at these sob stories without the realization that their money never even gets seen by the subjects in the video suffering from poverty. The fees that impact the donations are part of the problem, but the bigger problem is social media grifters exploiting suffering children for their gain. Tiktok is a malignant tumor on society.
Let me make few quotes from this BBC news that makes me emotional because of the way poor people in camp in Syria were exploited by TikTok.
This is why I like bitcoin, no central authority is involved, rather than virtual assets that can only be converted to fiat on TikTok.
I see this as a way TikTok is exploiting poor people with the centralized tradable virtual assets on the platform. What about you, is this not an exploit while TikTok is saying it is the people in the camp that are exploiting the minors (or let us use donators)?
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-63213567
Quote
Children are livestreaming on the social media app for hours, pleading for digital gifts with a cash value. The BBC saw streams earning up to $1,000 (£900) an hour, but found the people in the camps received only a tiny fraction of that.
Quote
The company said this type of content was not allowed on its platform, and it said its commission from digital gifts was significantly less than 70%. But it declined to confirm the exact amount.
Quote
The gifts they're asking for are virtual, but they cost the viewers real money and can be withdrawn from the app as cash. Livestream viewers send the gifts - ranging from digital roses, costing a few cents, to virtual lions costing around $500 - to reward or tip creators for content.
Quote
Families in the camps said they were receiving only a tiny fraction of these sums, however.
Quote
With TikTok declining to say how much it takes from gifts, the BBC ran an experiment to track where the money goes.
A reporter in Syria contacted one of the TikTok-affiliated agencies saying he was living in the camps. He obtained an account and went live, while BBC staff in London sent TikTok gifts worth $106 from another account.
At the end of the livestream, the balance of the Syrian test account was $33. TikTok had taken 69% of the value of the gifts.
A reporter in Syria contacted one of the TikTok-affiliated agencies saying he was living in the camps. He obtained an account and went live, while BBC staff in London sent TikTok gifts worth $106 from another account.
At the end of the livestream, the balance of the Syrian test account was $33. TikTok had taken 69% of the value of the gifts.
Quote
The $33 remaining from the BBC's $106 gift was reduced by a further 10% when it was withdrawn from the local money transfer shop. TikTok middlemen would take 35% of the remainder, leaving a family with just $19.
This is why I like bitcoin, no central authority is involved, rather than virtual assets that can only be converted to fiat on TikTok.
I see this as a way TikTok is exploiting poor people with the centralized tradable virtual assets on the platform. What about you, is this not an exploit while TikTok is saying it is the people in the camp that are exploiting the minors (or let us use donators)?
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-63213567
Jump to: