Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The effects of algorithms on the public discourse

tekhne.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 97 posts

Re: The effects of algorithms on the public discourse

#41

Post by the_af »

rmunn wrote: post #29
the_af wrote: post #19

I agree with the sentiment, and I do have a blog (of which I'm the only visitor as I don't advertise it). However... for me, the communities come first. I mean I do have a goal in my internet usage, and this goal comes before any principled stands (mostly; there are exceptions). So if, for example, the hobby communities around games and crafts I enjoy form in Facebook, what can I do? Facebook sucks as a platform, but…

> Also, YouTube Premium because I can't stand ads. Yes, I'm aware I'm paying the mafia thugs to leave me alone. It sucks. uBlock Origin has been able to block 100% of Youtube ads in my experience so far; granted I don't visit Youtube all the time. I also use yt-dlp to download videos so that I can timeshift them and watch them later when I'm not connected to WiFi and yet not burn through my phone data. This also happ…

> uBlock Origin has been able to block 100% of Youtube ads in my experience so far;

What about mobile and the YouTube app?

Re: The effects of algorithms on the public discourse

#42

Post by MPSimmons »

freddie_mercury wrote: post #30

I'm not sure "we" traded anything. Back in the day an absolutely minuscule portion of humanity read blogs. Technology Connections has 3 million subscribers. That's over 10x the number of people reading the most popular blogs in the world circa 2010[1]. And Technology Connections is only a moderately popular channel. If you look at the bigger channels like Mark Rober it is more like 350x. What actually happened was th…

It wasn't just about the subscribers. Blogs were incredibly useful as long-form documentation of unique problems and experiences, too. I used to write in my blog (Standalone SysAdmin), and it had over a million hits per year a few times, and the majority of those hits which didn't come from going viral about ashtrays in airplane bathrooms were people searching for the same problems I'd encountered and written about.

Re: The effects of algorithms on the public discourse

#43

Post by ascagnel_ »

whycome wrote: post #32
LocalH wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't want any algorithms, AI or human, curating my default feed. I want my feed to be a chronologically-ordered listing of the content creators I choose to follow and like. If I want to explore the algorithm, that should still be possible, but it shouldn't be the default.

That's what the subscriptions feed is. But in practice (when one subscribes to a lot of creators) it isn't always useful.

I've found that creators and channels I've subscribed to don't always appear in the subscriptions feed. Thankfully, YouTube still posts an RSS feed for every channel, and following a bunch of them in my reader app reliably captures all the output. I'll dip in and out, only watching what I want, and it's harder to do that when a chunk of the feed is silently hidden from view.

Re: The effects of algorithms on the public discourse

#44

Post by dostick »

HeavenFox wrote: post #33
whycome wrote: post #10

The article mentions "Technology Connections titled 'Algorithms Are Breaking How We Think'" I'm a huge fan of the channel, and that video is mostly great and insightful. But his being "puzzled" at the way people use the subscriptions "feed" is kinda surprising. The low percentaged from that feed should lead to asking questions to understand why, instead of assuming people are "doing it wrong". People use subscription…

Yeah I don't understand why all YouTubers seem to despise "the algorithm", and some of the creators I follow even created their own rival, Nebula, that does not have "the algorithm". Without "the algorithm" I wouldn't find out about your channel in the first place!

What is the purpose of that algorithm. I think YouTube’s algorithm purpose is to keep people engaged. The ethical algorithm would only suggest content user is interested in or may be interested based on interests of other users with similar subscriptions.

Re: The effects of algorithms on the public discourse

#45

Post by [deleted] »

startupsfail wrote: post #31
xyzelement wrote: post #21

I am friends with a lot of religious people and they are rocking technology right now. They use the internet purposefully - eg following rabbis who have a reputation that they found out about from someone in person. It's very old school and kinda cool to see people use technology and feel elevated rather than denigrated by it.

This is great to hear. Churches are often in the prime real estate areas, it'd be great, if the attendance / donations would fall to zero. And if these places would be redeveloped into open-for-all urban green islands. Rather than exclusive worship clubs.

[deleted]

Re: The effects of algorithms on the public discourse

#46

Post by pezezin »

ascagnel_ wrote: post #43
whycome wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's what the subscriptions feed is. But in practice (when one subscribes to a lot of creators) it isn't always useful.

I've found that creators and channels I've subscribed to don't always appear in the subscriptions feed. Thankfully, YouTube still posts an RSS feed for every channel, and following a bunch of them in my reader app reliably captures all the output. I'll dip in and out, only watching what I want, and it's harder to do that when a chunk of the feed is silently hidden from view.

There is an additional setting for notifications. Click on the little bell to the side of the channel name, and make sure to select to get all the notifications, otherwise they might get hidden.

Re: The effects of algorithms on the public discourse

#47

Post by seydar »

xyzelement wrote: post #21

I am friends with a lot of religious people and they are rocking technology right now. They use the internet purposefully - eg following rabbis who have a reputation that they found out about from someone in person. It's very old school and kinda cool to see people use technology and feel elevated rather than denigrated by it.

I'd love to know more, do you have any that you'd recommend?

Re: The effects of algorithms on the public discourse

#48

Post by JumpCrisscross »

freddie_mercury wrote: post #30

I'm not sure "we" traded anything. Back in the day an absolutely minuscule portion of humanity read blogs. Technology Connections has 3 million subscribers. That's over 10x the number of people reading the most popular blogs in the world circa 2010[1]. And Technology Connections is only a moderately popular channel. If you look at the bigger channels like Mark Rober it is more like 350x. What actually happened was th…

> Back in the day an absolutely minuscule portion of humanity read blogs

What I think it comes down to is us, on one level, grasping the benefits of elitist gatekeeping, but, on another level, not wanting to acknowledge that such mechanisms have benefits.

The elitism I speak of isn’t one of wealth, family or schooling. Instead it’s intellectual curiosity. That seems to correlate with the foregoing; hence the discomfort (at least in democratic societies).

Simply: when the internet was peopled by the curious and clever, it was fun. When it had to—or could—cater to a lower common denominator, it did. And that gave us this crap.

Re: The effects of algorithms on the public discourse

#49

Post by arjie »

freddie_mercury wrote: post #30

I'm not sure "we" traded anything. Back in the day an absolutely minuscule portion of humanity read blogs. Technology Connections has 3 million subscribers. That's over 10x the number of people reading the most popular blogs in the world circa 2010[1]. And Technology Connections is only a moderately popular channel. If you look at the bigger channels like Mark Rober it is more like 350x. What actually happened was th…

The problem for people who preferred the text-based approach is that previously they were over-represented and found things they liked everywhere. Like you say, the vast majority of people prefer image reels, short-form video, microblogs like Twitter, or comments on aggregators like Reddit or HN. That's the truth, but that original cohort of people lost their place and there's no obvious substitute.

I think that's primarily because there's no Schelling point for this. There's no single place where everyone who preferred the other form would go to. Perhaps there are webrings out there and stuff like that, but I haven't seen anything.

I've submitted my friends' blogs to the Kagi Small Web (and I'm in there as well) and almost everything there has a human feel to it, but it does not have cluster-navigation.

Re: The effects of algorithms on the public discourse

#50

Post by typewithrhythm »

freddie_mercury wrote: post #30

I'm not sure "we" traded anything. Back in the day an absolutely minuscule portion of humanity read blogs. Technology Connections has 3 million subscribers. That's over 10x the number of people reading the most popular blogs in the world circa 2010[1]. And Technology Connections is only a moderately popular channel. If you look at the bigger channels like Mark Rober it is more like 350x. What actually happened was th…

It's really not that simple; the environment that allowed for the kind of appealing interactions blogs offered is much harder to come by.

Early days had a barrier to entry that made the public who would read and engage much more enjoyable to write for.

The universal internet is not the same thing as the one that naturally filtered it's participants.

Post reply on HN