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

Netflix and the Napoleon Dynamite Problem (2008)

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 57 posts

Re: Netflix and the Napoleon Dynamite Problem (2008)

#31

Post by c1505 »

rogerbinns wrote: post #3

I've been getting increasingly frustrated at Netflix, because it keeps recommended things I have already seen, or definitely do not want to see. Having to keep scrolling through unwanted content like that really reinforces just how dumb it is, despite all these claims about their intelligence. Eventually I did figure out that on the website you can say you aren't interested in particular items, but Android/Roku etc d…

I am getting really annoyed at this too. It almost seems like an intentional thing to get me to not choose something. The ratings are usually pretty accurate, but then it shows me something with a half a star in "Top picks for me". Also, often if i watch one documentary, next time i log in, 90% documentaries shown. For some reason it is designed to show me the same things as what i just watched.

Re: Netflix and the Napoleon Dynamite Problem (2008)

#32

Post by JoshM33k »

elijahmoore wrote: post #23
mozumder wrote: post #12

To be fair, even people aren't able to judge a movie properly. People often change their opinion of movies on second viewing. Just watching a movie at different times of day can significantly alter your opinion of a movie.

Agreed here. I also think that the overall vagueness of the five-star rating system makes it hard for users to express their true opinion. Algorithms are "garbage-in, garbage-out", and I think a five-star rating response represents "garbage-in". Unfortunately it would be risky and expensive for Netflix to change its rating system at this point.

Interesting. What do you think is vague about the five star system? Or is it any rating system that would be "garbage-in"?

Being interested in video games, I've thought a lot about rating systems. Older magazines used to use 10 (or even 100) point scales, and you quickly realize all the rating ends up taking place in the top 30-40 percent of your scale anyway... so why not limit the gradations. For my money, 5 stars makes sense... you've got a middle of the road "average" 3 star movie, and then two stars above and below.

Re: Netflix and the Napoleon Dynamite Problem (2008)

#33

Post by kelseydh »

jandrese wrote: post #19
AlwaysBCoding wrote: post #8

All those hours and millions of dollars into perfecting their recommendation system, and Popcorn Time still has a better UI for viewing movies than Netflix does. Just show me all the top movies and let me pick one, why partition them into drama/comedy and filter out the one's you don't think I'll like? it makes the experience worse.

Or you know, just let me use scrollbars instead of having to wait for your stupid javascript to SLOOOOOWLY pan the movie list. And then I have to hover and usually click through to get details about a movie. What's wrong with vertical lists with relevant information next to the picture? Something like every shopping interface ever? Using Netflix is like going to a grocery store, deciding that you want some canned cor…

It might partially be due to how it makes the list of good movies look bigger than it really is.

Re: Netflix and the Napoleon Dynamite Problem (2008)

#34

Post by Animats »

Netflix, having crushed the video store industry, no longer needs this. What's the alternative? Redbox?

"Even though Net­flix has a good deal of demographic information about its users, the company does not currently use it much to generate movie recommendations; merely knowing who people are, paradoxically, isn’t very predictive of their movie tastes."

"Targeted" advertising suffers from that model. Demographics matter only a little. What you've bought (which Amazon knows) matters far more.

Re: Netflix and the Napoleon Dynamite Problem (2008)

#35

Post by cwbrandsma »

Pxtl wrote: post #30
jandrese wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or you know, just let me use scrollbars instead of having to wait for your stupid javascript to SLOOOOOWLY pan the movie list. And then I have to hover and usually click through to get details about a movie. What's wrong with vertical lists with relevant information next to the picture? Something like every shopping interface ever? Using Netflix is like going to a grocery store, deciding that you want some canned cor…

Seriously, Netflix' UI is a complete trainwreck. The searching is painful too. I still cannot find a way to say "give me all your View Askew movies" or "all your DC Animated movies". The search is woefully primitive and there is functionally no UI for categories... can't I just pick multiple category tags? Or see all the categories you're using under the hood?

I agree there are some problems with the ui, but at the same time the number of devices they design for is quite large (desktop web, mobile phone, set-top boxes, Apple TV, Google TV, Amazon TV, etc). Creating a UI that is consistent between all of them must be a bit daunting.

Re: Netflix and the Napoleon Dynamite Problem (2008)

#36

Post by kelseydh »

quotedmycode wrote: post #2

From what I understand, they never implemented any of the algorithms, because their existing one was good enough, and the premise has changed. It used to be, you'd make suggestions so people could get DVDs sent to them, and you'd know they would enjoy it. Now with streaming, the cost to send something you don't like is cheap. So the recommendation engine just has to come up with something you'd try to watch and perha…

A lot of Netflix's success comes from finding great, unknown movies and allowing you to discover them. They're great for Netflix because they're cheap for them and provide high value.

When Netflix users only decide what movies to watch based only on the titles they recognize from marketing campaigns, their disappointment with Netflix's selection will be higher.

Their optimal strategy is to have a recommendation engine that routes users to good, but unknown movies that they know people end up enjoying if they just take the dive to start watching them.

Re: Netflix and the Napoleon Dynamite Problem (2008)

#38

Post by Amezarak »

zyxley wrote: post #11
rogerbinns wrote: post #3

I've been getting increasingly frustrated at Netflix, because it keeps recommended things I have already seen, or definitely do not want to see. Having to keep scrolling through unwanted content like that really reinforces just how dumb it is, despite all these claims about their intelligence. Eventually I did figure out that on the website you can say you aren't interested in particular items, but Android/Roku etc d…

"Things I've already seen" is the worst part of it for me, and is making me more and more likely to cancel the service out of (possibly misplaced) anger at feeling like Netflix is just regurgitating the same content at me to hide lack of a fuller back catalog.

On the other hand, rewatching is probably 90% of my usage and that's very helpful. I suspect that's why they leave it there: a lot of the audience uses Netflix like TV and they just want something familiar on in the background.

Re: Netflix and the Napoleon Dynamite Problem (2008)

#39

Post by hayksaakian »

redthrowaway wrote: post #25
mrspeaker wrote: post #14

"If you use a computerized system based on ratings, you will tend to get very relevant but safe answers"... I call this my "Radiohead metric": for a given music recommendation system, how long do I have to use it before it tries to recommend me Radiohead. One of the problems I find in music algorithms is they can't know how I've changed - suggesting music based on what I play or input - but that's stuff I liked in mi…

Applying weight to each rating based on its age seems like such an obvious fix that someone must have tried it and realized that it makes things worse.

You can't really know that.

Sometimes the things we miss are the most obvious.

Re: Netflix and the Napoleon Dynamite Problem (2008)

#40

Post by elijahmoore »

JoshM33k wrote: post #32
elijahmoore wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed here. I also think that the overall vagueness of the five-star rating system makes it hard for users to express their true opinion. Algorithms are "garbage-in, garbage-out", and I think a five-star rating response represents "garbage-in". Unfortunately it would be risky and expensive for Netflix to change its rating system at this point.

Interesting. What do you think is vague about the five star system? Or is it any rating system that would be "garbage-in"? Being interested in video games, I've thought a lot about rating systems. Older magazines used to use 10 (or even 100) point scales, and you quickly realize all the rating ends up taking place in the top 30-40 percent of your scale anyway... so why not limit the gradations. For my money, 5 stars…

My thoughts are generally in line with yours - big problem from the consumer's perspective is tendency for most titles to end up in the 3.8 to 4.2 range. Not very helpful when I'm browsing titles.

The stars are also just a snapshot of feeling, and don't account for any context like expectations, identity, mood etc. Maybe I'd give Black Swan five stars because it was impressive and won awards, but it doesn't mean I necessarily enjoyed it or would recommend it to others. Perhaps a system based loosely on Net Promoter Score ideas could be more helpful

Post reply on HN