If they could simply make the "Not interested" feature work that would be great.
yep, feels like they completely ignore it, right up to the point they just re-recommend the same videos.
Continuing our work to improve recommendations on YouTube
21–30 of 311 posts
Re: Continuing our work to improve recommendations on YouTube
#22People in the Ministry of Truth were engaged in a similar activity. Can hardly wait when they start to hand out free soma to silence us off.
Re: Continuing our work to improve recommendations on YouTube
#23[flagged]
Re: Continuing our work to improve recommendations on YouTube
#24Long overdue. Maybe in a few months I can watch a Joe Rogan podcast video without tainting my YouTube recommendations for the next year with Ben Shapiro-style clickbait.
Youtube OBLITERATES elektor's recommendations with Logic & Reason!
Re: Continuing our work to improve recommendations on YouTube
#25Long overdue. Maybe in a few months I can watch a Joe Rogan podcast video without tainting my YouTube recommendations for the next year with Ben Shapiro-style clickbait.
However, who determines what is a conspaircy? The government might be deciding that Iraq has WMDs and any evidence to the contrary is a conspiracy. While some measures are needed to be taken, who decides what is? No one is truly impartial. The censorship (while required due to how much crap is in YouTube) might devolve to 1984 without comple transparency, which we all know google isn’t providing.
Honestly, every time I hear an argument along these lines, that any attempt at moderating content will inevitably devolve into 1984 style censorship because all terms are arbitrary and "what even is x?", it becomes less convincing.
Unless the US government bans all sites except google and turns Youtube into a direct propaganda tool and declares that publishing any unauthorized content is a crime, then the worst that can happen here is that Youtube's updated algorithm fails to serve the needs of its userbase, in which case it will probably be amended due to a drop in the site's popularity and engagement metrics.
Content that isn't recommended hasn't been censored, it's still discoverable as long as it exists on the platform, and free speech remains unaffected even when a single platform decides to alter its algorithm in a way that might slightly reduce the immediacy of certain kinds of content.
Not all slopes are slippery.
Re: Continuing our work to improve recommendations on YouTube
#26Re: Continuing our work to improve recommendations on YouTube
#27If they could simply make the "Not interested" feature work that would be great.
[deleted]
Re: Continuing our work to improve recommendations on YouTube
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the other hand, I wouldn't know who Ben Shapiro is without having watched Rogan videos. It's an important info to have, because it tells you what people are interested in, and what they believe in. You can't communicate efficiently without knowing that.
I don't know who Ben Shapiro is so I'm just using him as an example and maybe he is noteworthy, but if the system tells everyone to watch Ben Shapiro videos of course everyone is gonna know who he is. Maybe he wouldn't be 'required knowledge' if youtube didn't force it and reinforce it on everyone. The current system doesn't tell you what people are interested in, it tells you what the system made the people pay inte…
To take the position that people only believe stuff because it is fed to them is incredibly patronizing. Sure, the fundamental dynamic of social media (that immediate and direct feedback about what captures user attention is used to determine what users see) makes things more polarized, but people are polarized to begin with. Conservatives are conservatives because they have a fundamentally different outlook about the world, not because they just happened to fall down a specific click hole on the internet.
Re: Continuing our work to improve recommendations on YouTube
#29It does seem to be getting better, for a long while I had to make sure to clear my history of any conservative leaning videos or I'd end up down a rabbit hole. Too many and all of a sudden its bloody flat earth videos and other insane conspiracies. Made it very difficult to try and watch a balanced set of videos.
[deleted]
Re: Continuing our work to improve recommendations on YouTube
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the other hand, I wouldn't know who Ben Shapiro is without having watched Rogan videos. It's an important info to have, because it tells you what people are interested in, and what they believe in. You can't communicate efficiently without knowing that.
I don't know who Ben Shapiro is so I'm just using him as an example and maybe he is noteworthy, but if the system tells everyone to watch Ben Shapiro videos of course everyone is gonna know who he is. Maybe he wouldn't be 'required knowledge' if youtube didn't force it and reinforce it on everyone. The current system doesn't tell you what people are interested in, it tells you what the system made the people pay inte…
>The current system doesn't tell you what people are interested in, it tells you what the system made the people pay interest to.
I agree with you 100% here. But this problem can't be fixed. All that's about to happen is Google is going to decide that people will be interested in something Google finds more palatable. I don't know how to fix/escape this problem.