什么问题？does tiktok support genocide？ 爱慕忘机 发表于 2023-03-28 11:09
TikTok has blocked videos about human rights in China, particularly those that reference Xinjiang internment camps and the Uyghur genocide, and disabled the accounts of users who post them.
TikTok has blocked videos about human rights in China, particularly those that reference Xinjiang internment camps and the Uyghur genocide, and disabled the accounts of users who post them.
小豆 发表于 2023-03-28 14:36
你说的这个是问题吗？ yes or no question？ 你这水平还不如那帮congressmen呢
听证会大家都知道什么回事，不是真的要听一些什么答案。凭他一人对那么多人刁难还能礼貌应对，有的问题答得不太完美，也正常。要是能有多一个人跟他一起上场，他有多一点时间思考，回答的也许更好。 有几个问题比如说他答自己是新加坡人 还有 说“will get back to you”都是答得不太好，但要听清楚问题马上反应，而且他思考的时间也不长，也没有让人重复问题让自己多点时间思考，也算是表现不错的。
听证会大家都知道什么回事，不是真的要听一些什么答案。凭他一人对那么多人刁难还能礼貌应对，有的问题答得不太完美，也正常。要是能有多一个人跟他一起上场，他有多一点时间思考，回答的也许更好。 有几个问题比如说他答自己是新加坡人 还有 说“will get back to you”都是答得不太好，但要听清楚问题马上反应，而且他思考的时间也不长，也没有让人重复问题让自己多点时间思考，也算是表现不错的。 Sweetbitter 发表于 2023-03-28 22:47
不觉得政客都是吃白饭浪费纳税人的钱吗。 问些问题莫名其妙：你同意CCP 屠杀维族人吗？ 我呸了个去，换我也一脸懵，我来解释一个APP，你的问题相关吗？ 还有APP 能不能ACCESS HOME WIFI，我呸，技术白痴。
Questions like 'Does TikTok use WiFi' shows that US Congress isn’t equipped to legislate tech Questions that left a lot to be asked Some of the questions that were put before Chew were not only inarticulate and incoherent, they exposed that some of the members who were tasked with grilling TikTok and its CEO, lack a basic understanding of tech and how data and tech function. Also read: US lawmakers grill TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew, call for ban Case in point would be Representative Richard Hudson (R-NC) of the Republicans, who put up a rather bizarre question to CEO Chew. He asked, if TikTok accessed the home WiFi network of a user. Not able to understand the question at first, Chew replied saying “Only if the user turns on the WiFi, I am sorry, I may not understand the question.” To this, Rep. Hudson elaborated, “If I have the TikTok app on my phone, and my phone is on my home WiFi network, does TikTok have access to that network?” To this, CEO Chew replied by saying what any person with a basic understanding of tech would say. “It will have to access the network to get connection to the Internet, if that’s the question.” Missed opportunities While some people have argued that the question that Rep. Hudson asked was valid, people don’t seem to understand the damage that such questions have on the hearing. A much better question would have been “If my phone has the TikTok app, and my phone is connected to my Home’s WiFi network, does TikTok have access to other devices on my Home WiFi?” Because of the way the question was framed by Rep. Hudson, two things happened. First, TikTok wouldn’t have been able to set the narrative of how it gets connected to the internet, and what protocols does it follow in that regard. Second, and more importantly, a very important line of questioning was missed because of how the question was framed. Irrespective of how CEO Chew would have responded ot the question, knowing what we know about TikTok and its practices, it would have opened up a pandora’s box for TikTok and its CEO at the hearing. This would have definitely put him in a tighter spot. Congress’ history of inadequacy This isn’t the first time when the US Congress’ inability to deal with tech companies was in display. Back in 2018, when Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg was called to testify before Congress, these were some of the questions he was asked to answer. “If I’m emailing within WhatsApp … does that inform your advertisers?” “Mr. Zuckerberg… Hypothetically, if someone’s VCR won’t stop flashing 12:00, how would you suggest they fix that?” “Mr. Zuckerberg, a magazine i recently opened came with a floppy disk offering me 30 free hours of something called America On-Line. Is that the same as Facebook?” “Is Twitter the same as what you do?” “Would you bring some fiber, because we don’t have connectivity?” More than an enquiry or an investigation, the line of questioning became a tech support channel of sorts. Luckily, with TikTok, the line of questioning was still somewhat better. Even if it wasn’t on point, it was still a lot closer than what we have seen in the past.
他老婆事业一般。他老婆MBA毕业时候第一个工作在新加坡的一个公司，叫Chope，做head of BD & marketing. 查了下Chope这个公司到现在员工数才201-499人。在十几年前，估计就是十几个人的小公司。 她2013年又加入了WeLab。这个公司到现在十年过去了，也只有111个员工。 印象中台湾女生比较会找LG（找钱）。 Vivian Kao joined WeLab in 2013 and is responsible for strategic growth initiatives, including marketing, business development and day-to-day operations in Hong Kong. Prior to joining WeLab, Vivian was Head of Product Management and Marketing at Chope in Singapore and an equity research analyst at Goldman Sachs in New York. Vivian holds an MBA fromHarvard Business School and a Bachelor of Arts from Wellesley College. https://www.crunchbase.com/person/vivian-kao
legacy家庭出来名校是他们命定的啊。如果不是上个很难啃的专业，或者在工作中做出成绩，我觉得没法断定优秀。
上哈佛MBA这种太水了。感觉真是读不了书的白富美。周MBA 一毕业就partner,我不知道是不是VC都那么好混。他自己聪明应该有点，努力也应该有。可是起点和扶助是绝对优势。
这个是真的，我一个同学做了多年投资公司后来空降成某美国上市公司CFO了。也好也不好吧，融资这块熟，但是实际如何帮助业务发展不知道。
你一贯胡搅蛮缠的本事很高。😂
周不是作为中国人被针对，他是作为中国公司代表被针对。 切割了吗？像另一个傻。说的，不让在国内用就算切割？那不是为了防止中国底层民众资产阶级自由化设的墙？data全送中国叫切割？
TikTok has blocked videos about human rights in China, particularly those that reference Xinjiang internment camps and the Uyghur genocide, and disabled the accounts of users who post them.
他就是新加坡人啊
估计是他老婆家族厉害，或者是哈佛里认识了什么大人物的孩子，哈佛毕业去一个俄罗斯基金，还是合伙人，然后投了一大堆中国明星企业，这一步一定是猫腻呀
你说的这个是问题吗？ yes or no question？
你这水平还不如那帮congressmen呢
我也是
第一次听说Harvard MBA水……
你理解能力不足哈，人家的问题是因为这个怀疑提的。
Google和非死不可有中国部分吗？不是都被禁了。美国禁止抖音也是正常
你是穷孩子的话另说。对于legacy那就是个水专业。象利丰冯国纶先在普林斯顿拿下engineering的学位再去读的哈佛MBA可以。他哥是MIT EE硕士，完了读的哈佛经济博士，那叫优秀。
感觉新加坡人很爽 国际认可度高 双母语 西化和文明程度高 也有东方文化的底蕴 新加坡人的身份更容易得到best of both worlds
MBA一毕业就partner真的够神的
这种cfo本来就是帮助融资的
你自己管不了自己的孩子不用，怪一个大公司……
他说英文好像不像新加坡说英文的口音。
更重要的是，与美国利益想不想符合
我还以为他一开口会是英国口音。略失望。
这有啥奇怪的，这里恨tiktok的也可以不让自己孩子用啊，不非得让人把它ban了。
还全世界都说小周完胜呢，也不看看听证会后Meta的股票涨了多少。看了听证会就知道，连CEO都不敢否认这应用和中国政府的关系。
我觉得小周不错。昨天晚上油管有一个panel讨论这事，有一个亚裔女生也挺不错。
目前中美关系紧张，商家夹在中间倒霉。昨晚油管还看了一个美国海军的访问，讲中国扩张，南海那不是中国的后花园，我们要制止中国扩张。
你的全世界不是真的全世界
美国认为这个app是中国公司，中国也认为是中国的公司，只有tt自己不认为是中国公司。。。
这个完全有可能的 不了解新加坡兵役了吧
说自己是新加坡人有什么问题么 不是针对“这也包括你”的回答么？ 不懂为什么哭笑不得
真别吹了 很快不这么嘚瑟了
新加坡白手套很多，各个产业的，听说的各种startup小公司。帮着转移资产的啊洗钱的啊。有些年纪轻轻没什么背景可能只是在北美学历不错的，却忽然有资本在东南亚或北美run了一个公司的，都可以合理质疑一下，没毛病。
楼里大妈酸唧唧的。。 看到一个平头正脸的代表中国公司，别提有多难受了。。 就跟当年怪零出来一样。。。 要是她们的小孩能爬到这个位置的一半，她们就该烧香了。。
大摩以前的首席经济学家谢国忠就是因为大嘴巴说新加坡是靠给印尼和东南亚权贵洗钱发展起来的，新加坡政府找了大摩，他就被开掉了……
我特意查了一下meta的股票。没涨啊。
现在比一周前还低。
tim cook也不让小孩用
哈哈哈哈哈哈，有才！
想知道这名字后面的含义，不会真是taking money的意思吧。。。
封的。tiktok和抖音是两个不同程度。tiktok内容抖音看不到，但抖音上有很多搬运号。youtube也是看不到，于是微博也有很多搬运号
是的，所以他到底什么背景感觉到现在都没人八出来，看来真是背景强大
他去小米之前事业飞升的踏板是去了一个有俄罗斯背景的投资公司，wiki上写 2010年获得哈佛商学院工商管理硕士学位。同年加入俄罗斯国际投资基金Digital Sky Technologies担任合伙人，主要针对互联网公司进行风险投资。
这种你跟我说没有红色背景，我是不信的，哈哈
那有怎样呢？ 那个国家机器不操纵舆论，非要把企业和政治挂钩或者脱节 都是没事找事的行为，大家心知肚明。Facebook 也去听证了，小扎照样左顾言它。
周以后也会面临被起诉吗？
还是说这事儿就这么过去了，hearing结束了，国会立法速度也没那么快，过一段时间一切就好像没发生过一样了？
不觉得政客都是吃白饭浪费纳税人的钱吗。 问些问题莫名其妙：你同意CCP 屠杀维族人吗？ 我呸了个去，换我也一脸懵，我来解释一个APP，你的问题相关吗？
还有APP 能不能ACCESS HOME WIFI，我呸，技术白痴。
他什么问题撒谎了？
Questions like 'Does TikTok use WiFi' shows that US Congress isn’t equipped to legislate tech
Questions that left a lot to be asked Some of the questions that were put before Chew were not only inarticulate and incoherent, they exposed that some of the members who were tasked with grilling TikTok and its CEO, lack a basic understanding of tech and how data and tech function. Also read: US lawmakers grill TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew, call for ban Case in point would be Representative Richard Hudson (R-NC) of the Republicans, who put up a rather bizarre question to CEO Chew. He asked, if TikTok accessed the home WiFi network of a user. Not able to understand the question at first, Chew replied saying “Only if the user turns on the WiFi, I am sorry, I may not understand the question.” To this, Rep. Hudson elaborated, “If I have the TikTok app on my phone, and my phone is on my home WiFi network, does TikTok have access to that network?” To this, CEO Chew replied by saying what any person with a basic understanding of tech would say. “It will have to access the network to get connection to the Internet, if that’s the question.” Missed opportunities While some people have argued that the question that Rep. Hudson asked was valid, people don’t seem to understand the damage that such questions have on the hearing. A much better question would have been “If my phone has the TikTok app, and my phone is connected to my Home’s WiFi network, does TikTok have access to other devices on my Home WiFi?” Because of the way the question was framed by Rep. Hudson, two things happened. First, TikTok wouldn’t have been able to set the narrative of how it gets connected to the internet, and what protocols does it follow in that regard. Second, and more importantly, a very important line of questioning was missed because of how the question was framed. Irrespective of how CEO Chew would have responded ot the question, knowing what we know about TikTok and its practices, it would have opened up a pandora’s box for TikTok and its CEO at the hearing. This would have definitely put him in a tighter spot. Congress’ history of inadequacy This isn’t the first time when the US Congress’ inability to deal with tech companies was in display. Back in 2018, when Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg was called to testify before Congress, these were some of the questions he was asked to answer. “If I’m emailing within WhatsApp … does that inform your advertisers?” “Mr. Zuckerberg… Hypothetically, if someone’s VCR won’t stop flashing 12:00, how would you suggest they fix that?” “Mr. Zuckerberg, a magazine i recently opened came with a floppy disk offering me 30 free hours of something called America On-Line. Is that the same as Facebook?” “Is Twitter the same as what you do?” “Would you bring some fiber, because we don’t have connectivity?” More than an enquiry or an investigation, the line of questioning became a tech support channel of sorts. Luckily, with TikTok, the line of questioning was still somewhat better. Even if it wasn’t on point, it was still a lot closer than what we have seen in the past.
拿维族人那个说的完全是莫名其妙。还有问谁帮他准备那个听证会的他其实完全可以不回答的。他好像答了说“will get back to you with details”, 还有问他公司员工有没有间谍什么的，要他保证是没有间谍那些的。这问题不好回答，你要是说不回答也好像让人家以为你默认。
搞了半天，就是美国老政客们给ccp 吓死了。
congress 那些人可逮着一个可以尽情发挥的机会了，完全就是N打一 这帮蠢货要是别的事也这么上心，不说别的， 起码夏时制早解决了， lol
小札那能一样么， 那是美国公司，是犹太主子， 你们表演也要悠着点
至于tiktok， 那些问题压根没法回答， 换谁来也没用 当时我想小周最好的应对应该是表演一下心脏病发作。。。。直接让他们没舞台可演
人家雇佣他，他的背景是很重要的一个因素
这个公司不会用大陆背景的人做CEO，
当然这个新家婆的也没用
回想一下，张一鸣的内涵段子，APP在大陆一朝被下架，他敢不服？TikTok，在印度被封，他怎么不去起诉？微信，在俄国几年前就被禁用，腾讯能拿到一分钱补偿吗？
网上看到的上面这句话 看来美国还是太文明了
对吓尿了，中国赢麻了。
周很优秀，不优秀他也做不成知名公司的CEO，这个不需要争辩。
但是这里讨论的是他的国会听证。 这个和他优秀与否基本没啥太大关系。 本来就是个吃屎的活儿，他也没有啥本领把这活儿变成品尝北京烤鸭
你非要情人眼里出西施，觉着这个优秀的帅哥把一群议员打的丢盔卸甲，也没问题，只要你高兴就好
能被看上拿去当白手套，还不够有本事么。。
就是， 历来能当上白手套的都是精英之才， 往往就是缺个红爹
比如马云之流
不是反对美国禁，只是觉得美国又当又立的表现太恶心。
不是说乔布斯不让自己孩子用任何电子设备？
你看听证会了吗？周回答了，新加坡管制13 岁以下儿童不能看，美国不行啊，要求所有content 都要available to 所有人，自由的代价和选择啊！
台湾女人都是结婚狂 工作上要求上进的很少
实话 洗钱本来就是金融的一部分
洗米华
真的都是一样
犀利 感觉关窍就在这
大妈看到自己孩子上黄网都吓得要死。。。 自己居然生了孩子！