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

ByteDance's Recommendation System

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 58 posts

Re: ByteDance's Recommendation System

#11

Post by davidjfelix »

mrfox321 wrote: post #9
xnx wrote: post #7

Like Facebook before, everyone talks about the TikTok algorithm being some super secret and valuable mystery. In reality, both Facebook and TikTok succeeded because they were at the right place at the right time and didn't screw things up. The TikTok recommendation system is smart and very well implemented, but nothing novel that couldn't be implemented by a dozen other teams.

Not true. Why do IG reels and YouTube shorts suck, then? They clearly built something superior. And it can't seem to be matched by the biggest tech companies.

My take: it's a mix of brand bundling and lack of data. They're roughly equivalent but shorts is bundled with youtube which has its own brand perception and reels are bundled with IG/FB and have their own brand perception. Additionally fewer users means less algorithmic data to keep viewers.

Tiktok was allowed to establish its own brand and develop a community while shorts and reels are intrinsically tied to their past. They may be able to escape that history but I don't think it's helping them be fast movers or win "cool" points.

Re: ByteDance's Recommendation System

#12

Post by xnx »

mrfox321 wrote: post #9
xnx wrote: post #7

Like Facebook before, everyone talks about the TikTok algorithm being some super secret and valuable mystery. In reality, both Facebook and TikTok succeeded because they were at the right place at the right time and didn't screw things up. The TikTok recommendation system is smart and very well implemented, but nothing novel that couldn't be implemented by a dozen other teams.

Not true. Why do IG reels and YouTube shorts suck, then? They clearly built something superior. And it can't seem to be matched by the biggest tech companies.

More data beats better algorithms. TikTok has vastly more interaction data by nature of its design. IG and YouTube shorts don't have nearly the volume of engaged users and are reluctant to disrupt the cash cow of their traditional interfaces.

Re: ByteDance's Recommendation System

#13

Post by rolandog »

davidjfelix wrote: post #10
pavlov wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's also a heavy element of manual curation in TikTok. They have people putting their fingers on the scales to decide what content gets promoted. Where are those people, and what's their agenda? Who knows. Releasing the recommender on Github is a way to try to diffuse that criticism. But it's just one part of the puzzle that is Tiktok's content distribution.

> They have people putting their fingers on the scales to decide what content gets promoted. Is this just your belief or is there evidence you can point to. How would you differentiate manual intervention from algorithmic intervention?

It was previously discussed in HN [0].

[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34480003

Re: ByteDance's Recommendation System

#14

Post by Majromax »

davidjfelix wrote: post #11
mrfox321 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not true. Why do IG reels and YouTube shorts suck, then? They clearly built something superior. And it can't seem to be matched by the biggest tech companies.

My take: it's a mix of brand bundling and lack of data. They're roughly equivalent but shorts is bundled with youtube which has its own brand perception and reels are bundled with IG/FB and have their own brand perception. Additionally fewer users means less algorithmic data to keep viewers. Tiktok was allowed to establish its own brand and develop a community while shorts and reels are intrinsically tied to their pa…

> My take: it's a mix of brand bundling and lack of data. They're roughly equivalent but shorts is bundled with youtube which has its own brand perception and reels are bundled with IG/FB and have their own brand perception. Additionally fewer users means less algorithmic data to keep viewers.

My intuition would work the other way around. I'd expect offerings from more established companies to have a big leg up in terms of usable data. Youtube should be able to use a viewer's entire watch/subscription history to inform itself about what shorts a user might like, even before they've interacted with their first short. Bytedance, on the other hand, has to start from scratch with each truly new user.

The coolness or stodginess of the company would be secondary to its effects. If boring-old-Youtube could promise shorts creators great exposure to an enthusiastic audience, it would win the platform regardless of its brand.

Re: ByteDance's Recommendation System

#15

Post by newsclues »

xnx wrote: post #12
mrfox321 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not true. Why do IG reels and YouTube shorts suck, then? They clearly built something superior. And it can't seem to be matched by the biggest tech companies.

More data beats better algorithms. TikTok has vastly more interaction data by nature of its design. IG and YouTube shorts don't have nearly the volume of engaged users and are reluctant to disrupt the cash cow of their traditional interfaces.

I question the assertion that TikTok has more interaction data than Google.

Re: ByteDance's Recommendation System

#16

Post by PittleyDunkin »

xnx wrote: post #7

Like Facebook before, everyone talks about the TikTok algorithm being some super secret and valuable mystery. In reality, both Facebook and TikTok succeeded because they were at the right place at the right time and didn't screw things up. The TikTok recommendation system is smart and very well implemented, but nothing novel that couldn't be implemented by a dozen other teams.

...so then instagram and facebook and twitter and bluesky and reddit and youtube etc etc all have extremely bad content discovery by choice? Why?

Re: ByteDance's Recommendation System

#17

Post by mrfox321 »

xnx wrote: post #12
mrfox321 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not true. Why do IG reels and YouTube shorts suck, then? They clearly built something superior. And it can't seem to be matched by the biggest tech companies.

More data beats better algorithms. TikTok has vastly more interaction data by nature of its design. IG and YouTube shorts don't have nearly the volume of engaged users and are reluctant to disrupt the cash cow of their traditional interfaces.

IG has plenty of data (I did ML at IG). Don't be naive.

Re: ByteDance's Recommendation System

#18

Post by pavlov »

yunohn wrote: post #6
pavlov wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's also a heavy element of manual curation in TikTok. They have people putting their fingers on the scales to decide what content gets promoted. Where are those people, and what's their agenda? Who knows. Releasing the recommender on Github is a way to try to diffuse that criticism. But it's just one part of the puzzle that is Tiktok's content distribution.

This is true for all social media algorithms. None of them are purely automated and for good reason. You need humans going in and tweaking the outcomes to ensure users have a good experience. Of course, when the conversation is about TikTok, this often becomes accusations of propaganda. But YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter all exert significant control over their algorithms and things like their Homepage, Trending Topi…

Sure. HN is very actively moderated, and most people here probably agree that it’s worth it. (Those who don’t like it presumably don’t stay here.)

But at the massive scale of Meta or ByteDance, there is a difference between removing problematic content and actively promoting content. They’re two sides of the same coin, but the first is applied based on reactive guidelines (“we’ve previously decided this kind of content shouldn’t be here”) while the second is ultimately an in-the-moment opinion on whether more people should be seeing the content. The line is blurry, but these are not the same thing, and vibes-based content promotion is easier to manipulate.

Are there CCP agents working at ByteDance? Of course there are because it’s practically mandatory — just like American telecom companies have NSA wiretap rooms. Do those CCP agents get consulted on which foreign political candidate should get the viral boost? Perhaps not. But it appears they’ve built a system where this kind of thing is possible and leaves little paper trail because the curated boosting is so integral to the platform.

Re: ByteDance's Recommendation System

#19

Post by wiseowise »

xnx wrote: post #12
mrfox321 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not true. Why do IG reels and YouTube shorts suck, then? They clearly built something superior. And it can't seem to be matched by the biggest tech companies.

More data beats better algorithms. TikTok has vastly more interaction data by nature of its design. IG and YouTube shorts don't have nearly the volume of engaged users and are reluctant to disrupt the cash cow of their traditional interfaces.

More data? Seriously? What has more data than YouTube?

Re: ByteDance's Recommendation System

#20

Post by tw1984 »

for those interested, Chinese laws forbid the export of recommendation systems, unless ByteDance is challenging the Chinese laws here, which is highly unlikely, this simple can not be the recommendation system used in their production.

will be far more interesting to know say what is the difference, what got changed/removed to make them feel comfortable that such an open source variant won't get them into troubles with some 3-letters-acronym agencies back home.

Post reply on HN