Live data from Hacker News

Protect me from what I want

tbray.org

21–30 of 225 posts

Re: Protect me from what I want

#21
post #8

Most Twitter users, as best I can tell, aren't actually complaining about what they see. They are complaining about what others see. In their view, they have the "correct opinions" and have not been biased by any algorithms or moderation. Meanwhile, the people that disagree with them are the ones being duped by algorithms, bad moderation, and bad actors. That's why there's a huge censorship movement right now in the…

> Most Twitter users, as best I can tell, aren't actually complaining about what they see. They are complaining about what others see.

FWIW this doesn't match my experience at all, but I've hardly made a study of it. What I mean by that is that the limited complaints I have heard are mostly about a) bad quality advertisement targeting and b) political targeting, also mostly bad quality.

"quality" here meaning accuracy of the targeting, not a comment on the content.

Re: Protect me from what I want

#22
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Read Marcuse's "Repressive Tolerance" to see why this is the case: https://www.marcuse.org/herbert/publications/1960s/1965-repr... The tl;dr is that if you actually want to move toward a society of free and equal human beings and eliminate oppression, "free speech for all" is not how you go about it. One side of the political spectrum supports equality and emancipation, the other is opposed to it. Therefore the speec…

This is the exact logic used by Joseph McCarthy, and I think it's safe to say that was a failed experiment. > Therefore the speech of one side must be tolerated and supported; the speech of the other must be squelched and restricted. This is actually how you get Nazis. You know, the real ones that existed before the internet. Not 4chan weebs trolling boomers online, but the ones that would jail or kill you for having…

That seems a-historical. The way you get the real nazis is by not acting soon enough when they target/vilify/'other' marginalized groups, or attempting to get a foothold in political institutions.

Re: Protect me from what I want

#23
post #18
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Read Marcuse's "Repressive Tolerance" to see why this is the case: https://www.marcuse.org/herbert/publications/1960s/1965-repr... The tl;dr is that if you actually want to move toward a society of free and equal human beings and eliminate oppression, "free speech for all" is not how you go about it. One side of the political spectrum supports equality and emancipation, the other is opposed to it. Therefore the speec…

A bit of a paradox, but a tolerant society does not tolerate intolerance.

[deleted]

Re: Protect me from what I want

#24
post #15
post #8

Most Twitter users, as best I can tell, aren't actually complaining about what they see. They are complaining about what others see. In their view, they have the "correct opinions" and have not been biased by any algorithms or moderation. Meanwhile, the people that disagree with them are the ones being duped by algorithms, bad moderation, and bad actors. That's why there's a huge censorship movement right now in the…

Read Marcuse's "Repressive Tolerance" to see why this is the case: https://www.marcuse.org/herbert/publications/1960s/1965-repr... The tl;dr is that if you actually want to move toward a society of free and equal human beings and eliminate oppression, "free speech for all" is not how you go about it. One side of the political spectrum supports equality and emancipation, the other is opposed to it. Therefore the speec…

> Therefore the speech of one side must be tolerated and supported; the speech of the other must be squelched and restricted.

This sounds like a distinction between say a friend and an enemy. Sounds like a political concept I have heard before.

Re: Protect me from what I want

#25
One other thought is that most algorithms don't need to be very sophisticated.

So DuckDuckGo is (mostly) predicated on the idea that if you type "mens running shoes" into a search box you can confidently sell ads for trainers all day, and possibly other sporty goods. The bet Gabriel Weinberg is making is that the accuracy / profit for selling those ads is not significantly worse than using the text plus a thousand data points about that persons pregnant daughter and bathroom habits. Inwoukd love to see some study on that (not sure how - maybe have google return duckduckgo results and see what they buy. Hell I would bet they have already done this !)

Anyway I suspect that I would get as much out of twitter if I just get what David Attenborough reads on twitter (ie a manual curation from someone interesting and well versed in the world)

Sometimes the best algorithm is a much more educated and experienced human

Re: Protect me from what I want

#26
post #18
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Read Marcuse's "Repressive Tolerance" to see why this is the case: https://www.marcuse.org/herbert/publications/1960s/1965-repr... The tl;dr is that if you actually want to move toward a society of free and equal human beings and eliminate oppression, "free speech for all" is not how you go about it. One side of the political spectrum supports equality and emancipation, the other is opposed to it. Therefore the speec…

A bit of a paradox, but a tolerant society does not tolerate intolerance.

It's a logical contradiction. There seems to be some overloading of the word "tolerance".

Re: Protect me from what I want

#27
Ah, the halcyon days of thrusting off the shackles of capitalism to have freedom in a decentralized digital environment where a new Social Contract is being negotiated! There's no way our idealism will feed a new class of nouveau riche that will sacrifice community ideals for profit.

Or to be more clear, Google ("Don't Be Evil") was founded in the same year that John Perry Barlow published A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace (1996). Barlow is dead and so is his dream. The Empire, long divided, must unite; long united, must divide.

Which is to say, federate the web all you want, but a Hamilton is inevitably going stomp on your Jeffersonian dream (and vice-versa).

https://www.eff.org/cyberspace-independence

Re: Protect me from what I want

#28
post #8

Most Twitter users, as best I can tell, aren't actually complaining about what they see. They are complaining about what others see. In their view, they have the "correct opinions" and have not been biased by any algorithms or moderation. Meanwhile, the people that disagree with them are the ones being duped by algorithms, bad moderation, and bad actors. That's why there's a huge censorship movement right now in the…

Sounds just like Hacker News.

Re: Protect me from what I want

#29
post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A bit of a paradox, but a tolerant society does not tolerate intolerance.

It's a logical contradiction. There seems to be some overloading of the word "tolerance".

Yes such overloading leads to paradoxes. My favorite https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unexpected_hanging_paradox

Re: Protect me from what I want

#30
It would be nice if there was a way to talk about this subject without immediately devolving into partisan political comparisons. This is a far more fundamental issue with recommendation systems, a conflict between immediate gratification and addiction mechanisms versus deeper nourishment and satisfaction. You can see this in so many arenas of human consumption.

Consider diet. If you log everything I ever consume and then measure the probability I consume the same thing again in the next 30 minutes, what are you going to find? You'll be recommending I eat nothing but donuts, hard liquor, and potato chips.

Consider video. If you log everything I ever stream and watch and then measure the probability I stream and watch something similar in the next 30 minutes, you'll be recommending nothing but ChiveTV-style fail videos and short-form hot takes.

But are these the things I actually most want? Humans are complex creatures with desires and preferences that don't always express themselves in terms of quick re-consumption of similar items. If you ask me my favorite film, I'm going to say Apocalypse Now, not an epic fail compilation. But if you measure what I'm more likely to watch on repeat for 8 hours, it's going to be the fail compilation. If you ask my preferred foods, I'm going to say lean meats and vegetables, but if you measure what I'm most likely to repeatedly eat for hours without stopping, you're going to find a bunch of dessert foods and snacks.

The types of things people consume that are most nourishing and satisfying, since they actually provide nourishment and satisfaction, are not things that lead to immediate re-consumption of the same thing. The types of things that lead to immediate re-consumption are things that are insubstantial, don't require thought or reflection, don't lead to satiety, and things that are addictive.

I have no idea what sort of solution to this scales and will satisfy people that don't like gatekeepers, because the reality is, I've found what films and television shows and music albums I've most liked from top 100 lists curated by experts, and I've found what foods best nourish me and lead to the long-term health and physique outcomes I'm trying to achieve by the same method, expert recommendations from people well-versed in science.

You can't automate this, but to work, the public has to trust a curator, and it seems most of the public doesn't trust anyone to do this, or if they do, they'd rather trust the Critical Drinker and Liver King instead of the American Film Institute and FDA.

Post reply on HN