Ask HN: How do we stop the polarization/toxicicity filling the web?

I agree that there's been an uptick in toxicity and polarization. I think it's partially due to more people being on the internet, the decentralized information sources on the internet, combined with human nature and generational and cultural reasons why it's difficult for some people to determine what is factual.

But the single biggest factor that's driving this, in my opinion, is recommendation systems. Every source of information now follows the same pattern to increase engagement: Fill up the screen with as many different links and recommendations as possible, and determine the links shown by a machine learning algorithm to increase engagement.

If you have an app to communicate with friends, don't show them their friend list, show them a "news feed". A video player? Put recommendations on the side, and at the end of the video, and pop up recommendations when they hit pause, and autoplay the next recommendation. Sort all comments and replies based on engagement.

This increases income, but it makes people go crazy. Because what kinds of content increases engagement? For a lot of people, it's crazy inflammatory content. Women insulting all men, men insulting all women, Black Lives Matters, Back the Blue, flat Earth, vaccines, conspiracy theories... eventually the algorithm will find what triggers you to click or stay engaged. And once it figures it out, you're hooked in a crazy polarized hatred cycle.

And it doesn't help that people and companies and Russian troll farms realize this and push inflammatory content for clicks and followers.

How do you stop this? I have no idea. On a personal level, I use uBlock to clean up all recommendations on sites that I visit, and I make an effort not to respond to engage in any of the toxicity. But that doesn't really solve the problem.

Companies don't want to solve it because they'll lose money. Legislation doesn't seem like the solution. Individuals will complain if you took away recommendations. No one really wants it to stop.

yes, not feeding the trolls is like "don't respond to spam." doesn't really solve either.

But it is the real world now ... People form their beliefs and make decisions in the world based on what they consume online.

I frequently see Twitter memes spoken from people's mouths in person. I mostly abstain from it, but like it or not, Twitter does matter.

I've also been online since 1993, and used Usenet for many years. Back then you could compartmentalize some argument as a bunch of nerds, but now it's just "people".

FWIW I also agree that the wisdom of "don't feed the trolls" has been forgotten. So in that way it's gotten worse too.

As an intellectual exercise,since you seem so passionate about the subject of anti-vaxxers...

Are all vaccines good? If not, who chooses? The government? What about when Gov. Rick Perry tried to force the HPV vaccine on all teenage girls in TX, even though it was suspected he had financial incentive to do so?

Is it ok for the state to force you or your kids to receive a medical treatment? Even when there are multiple demonstrated cases of drug companies breaking the law and corruption?

My point isn't to fall on either side of the debate.

My point is that it's wrong to silence the debate and to label people who are thinking about these things so simply as "anti-vaxxers" and dismiss them.

Reality is complex. As soon as you're 100% sure you're right, it'll bite you.

> More moderation.

Agreed. However moderation power is something that needs to be considered carefully. I think moderation power should be distributed broadly to the users who have shown good stewardship of the community via their participation, and not to a few chosen individuals.

> Higher barriers of entry.

Yes this is the key. It should take work to occupy mind-space. Your first comments should be shown to very few people, probably experienced users in the community, and their approval or disapproval will determine how much visibility your next comments get.