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

Twitter funding a team to develop an open standard for social media

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–426 of 426 posts

Re: Twitter funding a team to develop an open standard for social media

#421

Post by BlueTemplar »

specialist wrote: post #395
BlueTemplar wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just a technicality, but a "positive feedback loop" is probably the very thing that you might want to avoid. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_feedback

Ya, suboptimal phrasing. I mean in contrast to a negative feedback loop. Socially, negative or positive denotes impact. Virtuous vs vicious cycles. Suggestions for better phrases?

Nope, I've been scratching my head about those for a long time now, but haven't found anything better than adding a note wherever there might be a confusion... :/

Re: Twitter funding a team to develop an open standard for social media

#422

Post by BlueTemplar »

floatingatoll wrote: post #397
BlueTemplar wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean by "every post is moderated" ?

One or more human moderators are paid to review every post and comment before they’re published, making an accept/reject decision using criteria.

Oh, I didn't think you were serious about that - this is probably not feasible because it would be insanely "expensive" ? (I mean, Slashdot seems to have found the best middle ground here, haven't they ?)

Re: Twitter funding a team to develop an open standard for social media

#423

Post by acrispino »

ChristianBundy wrote: post #415
acrispino wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A while back, I came across this message: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16880060 Is this accurate currently? Its a turn off.

Yeah, none of us are very happy about that. It's a quirk of the main feed encoding type, but there are other feed types (e.g. Gabby-Grove) that are major improvements. Right now the main hurdle is just adding support for more feed types to the major clients, which is something I'm actively working on.

Thank you for responding. I wish your project well.

Re: Twitter funding a team to develop an open standard for social media

#424

Post by 9HZZRfNlpR »

save_ferris wrote: post #288
mathgenius wrote: post #57

"the value of social media is shifting away from content hosting and removal, and towards recommendation algorithms directing one’s attention" I really wish I could hack on the youtube recommendation algorithm. It seems to be tuned for zombie viewing pleasure, and totally not for finding surprising new content. Even just having several "personas" would be a big help.

Totally agree. The lack of configurability around recommendations is really frustrating. So often, the next video that plays is something tangentially related to what I'm watching, but still not what I want to watch. I'd love a feature that defaults the next video to the newest unwatched video in a given channel or something like that, but we all know why it won't be built.

Mine are always things I've already watched, and YouTube knows it. I suspect I have somehow crashed their 'AI' recommendation engine.

Re: Twitter funding a team to develop an open standard for social media

#425

Post by specialist »

floatingatoll wrote: post #419
specialist wrote: post #402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amen. Recommenders, like bureaucracies, are misanthropic (anti-human). The rules are meant to remove human judgement. While denying the baked in bias and dysfunction of the imposed ruleset. Per Goodhart's Law, they arbitrarily state some things are worthwhile & meaningful, and everything else are not. Black boxes which thwart inspection, transparency, accountability, explanation. -- Forgive me for flogging this horse…

Can adjudication be impartial with regards to civility?

I mean impartial in the sense that the adjudicators (judge, jury, arbiters, moderators, whomever) are not beholden to the publisher. So a third party. Like our court system is supposed to be.

IMHO, there's not enough daylight between ombudspersons and their paymasters.

I have no fixed opinion for standards of civility. I'm just trying to capture the notion that some dialog, rhetoric is out of bounds, as determined by the intended audience (context).

Re: Twitter funding a team to develop an open standard for social media

#426

Post by hgezim »

omnimus wrote: post #326
K0SM0S wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read this as a trivial 'truth' that I've internalized myself as well; but the way you worded it... makes me naively ask: doesn't it speak to the limitations or choices of XMPP itself then, not the idea of a common protocol, if businesses can't reliably extend the protocol (only custom fork, and somehow barring eventual upstream contrib, whatever)? I can think of an extensible protocol paradigm, with 'extensions' (r…

I actually don't think it has anything to do with technology or problems with XMPP. Corporations can move standards better than anyone (look at web and chrome/google). If Google and Facebook had scale problems then they would just build better implementation. Facebook messages happened when FB didn't have so many users and in chat space there were XMPP services like ICQ/Jabber. Network effect was against FB so it mad…

This has already started happening with things like AMP for Gmail.
Post reply on HN