[deleted]
The effects of algorithms on the public discourse
11–20 of 97 posts
Re: The effects of algorithms on the public discourse
#12I appreciate the advice at the bottom, but I'd love to hear more about what other people suggest for finding content that isn't algorithm based. Relatively niche but traditional bulletin board forums are good. Recent posts to the top do tend make some threads be attention hogs, but there's a human mod in the loop if the forum is small enough. I suppose chats (usually Discord) also fall into this as well. A smaller co…
[deleted]
Re: The effects of algorithms on the public discourse
#13I started using RSS. Not so much of the enshittification there. In fact it is sort of like using the web of 20 years ago.
Yeah, same here for the same reason. I installed FreshRSS in a Docker container on my home-server, found some blogs, and now that's what I'm subscribed to and reading.
Re: The effects of algorithms on the public discourse
#14Nice, there is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gemini_(protocol) which I went to over the last few years. But yes, I agree pretty much with the whole article.
Thanks for linking this! I've never heard of Gemini before now, and it definitely appeals to a lot of what I want in on the internet.
Re: The effects of algorithms on the public discourse
#15I appreciate the advice at the bottom, but I'd love to hear more about what other people suggest for finding content that isn't algorithm based. Relatively niche but traditional bulletin board forums are good. Recent posts to the top do tend make some threads be attention hogs, but there's a human mod in the loop if the forum is small enough. I suppose chats (usually Discord) also fall into this as well. A smaller co…
Small-blog-aggregators like Kottke are a goldmine. The trick, of course, is to remember to follow the interesting people he surfaces. And RSS. It never went away. Just use RSS.
Long live RSS.
Re: The effects of algorithms on the public discourse
#16The 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…
Some of it has to do with app defaults. When you load up YouTube it doesn’t go to the subscriptions, it goes to the Recommended page. It has enough of the new videos from subscribed channels people watch, plus enough of the new videos from channels they commonly watch without a subscription, that people have no reason to go to the Subscriptions page.
Launching from the Subscriptions is an intentional act by people who are actively trying to avoid the Recommendation page, or where the Recommendation page failed to surface what they wanted.
I would not be at all surprised if any using of the Subscriptions page triggered YouTube to adjust their algorithm for that user to see more of what they played on the Recommendation page. They probably see the use of the Subscriptions as a failure of the Recommendation engine.
For a short while my YouTube app on my AppleTV was showing Watch Later and Subscriptions when it launched. I loved it. I assume they were just A/B testing, because it stopped doing that after a while.
Re: The effects of algorithms on the public discourse
#17The 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…
I think avoiding algorithms completely is tricky. Even things like podcast guests or suggestions from friends feel as manipulable but in a human way.
What works for me is checking if people I respect in a domain also blog or link elsewhere. That is how I found Peter Norvig's blog... or maybe it was on hacker news.
Re: The effects of algorithms on the public discourse
#18I appreciate the advice at the bottom, but I'd love to hear more about what other people suggest for finding content that isn't algorithm based. Relatively niche but traditional bulletin board forums are good. Recent posts to the top do tend make some threads be attention hogs, but there's a human mod in the loop if the forum is small enough. I suppose chats (usually Discord) also fall into this as well. A smaller co…
Private group chats are the new social networks. It's apples and oranges but I think for people that really don't want to be "on social media" the alternative is to keep engagement with close friends on a group-by-group basis. So whatever they share on there is how I get my social-media awareness. It's basically intentionally a very very narrow filter. It has to be. Then, subscribe to paid publications, journalism, p…
Agreed.
And I feel society could go further in acknowledging the evolution of social networks.
They border on surrogate families, at this point.
Q: So, are there terms for the rules which are implicit or explicit, that apply to joiners of these private chat groups? Pseudo-kids?
Re: The effects of algorithms on the public discourse
#19I 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 I want to be in those communities because I enjoy being part of them. It's a trap, but one where there's no easy way out.
As for YouTube: my search history and the algorithm are my main use of YT; I wouldn't dream of turning them off. Because I basically use it for two things, my hobby things (subscribed to several channels I like) and watching cartoon clips with my daughter, all the algorithm ever recommends me is exactly those two things: cartoon clips and things related to my hobbies. Never rage bait, never random nonsense. When I click accidentally on rage bait inducing stuff, I remove it from my watch history; I know this isn't perfect but it works in the sense I don't get recommended that crap.
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.
This is no defense of YouTube, I know it can turn to shit any minute, but at least for me the algorithm works.
The one thing that is absolutely driving me nuts is the AI-driven en-slopification of the internet. I wish AI got magically banned from most venues. I want to interact with humans and human-created stuff, not AI spam. I think this is a battle that cannot be won, to my eternal sadness.
Again I must repeat I do agree with the sentiment of the blog post, and I wish the internet got de-enshitified again. I'm not sure it's that easy though.
Re: The effects of algorithms on the public discourse
#20I’m all for human-written content.
But, AI search is here. When you write for hours will it be just to have AI quote or amalgamate it, so you can have a link sit by it that few will click on? Or will you submit it to some old Yahoo-like index, HN, or peer-messaging app that reaches maybe typically 10 people typically or 100,000 once for your 15 minutes of fame?
When you write something fairly long, don’t do it for the clicks, unless you need the money. If you have something to say that’s that you think is important, sure, write it, but don’t bet on anything but making a few people mad. Do it because it’s what you want to do. AI can’t take that away from you, yet.
I’m sure I’ve recently read something great that was written by AI, though. It’s not all slop. It’s only a matter of time now before Armageddon.