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

Non-Consensual Personalization

amitp.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 239 posts

Re: Non-Consensual Personalization

#61

Post by OneLeggedCat »

flenserboy wrote: post #49
userbinator wrote: post #33

Instead of asking me what I want, they decide what I want. I'm not sure if authoritarianism is the right name for this trend, but I think it's also related to companies no longer wanting users to think of themselves as owning the products they bought, and the shift to subscription-based services. They want to turn users into dumb, docile, obedient cows to be milked for $$$, and what better than to start them down tha…

It is also done in part to hide just how thin most catalogs are. Notice how Netflix does not allow hiding any of their offerings. Imagine you had the ability to never see particular movies / shows / genres / movies you'd seen paraded before you again — when you cut out all the junk and things you'd never watch, you see the 10 choices left you might, depending on how bored you are, actually watch. Once you're there, y…

Yes. And Google. There are so many domains I want to never have show up in my search results. Think of one of the domains you hate, the ones that are never truthful, like oann.com is to me. Or all of the zillions of low-quality content farms that are generally ruining all Google results. I would be happy to just keep manually blocking all of them from ever showing up in my results. Google knows that a lot of people would want to do that, and will NEVER allow it. Google wants to steer me.

Re: Non-Consensual Personalization

#62

Post by LAC-Tech »

lmm wrote: post #23
LAC-Tech wrote: post #7

The author mentions linux... but where does this happen on linux? I love using a desktop that does exactly what I tell it. Yes it takes longer to set up. But I use a computer every day, it's worth it.

GNOME removed a lot of configurability that was present in previous versions.

Yeah but linux is configurable. Don't like your UI? Rip it out. It's not locked down like windows or mac.

SO feels very weird to blame linux here and not... GNOME.

Re: Non-Consensual Personalization

#63

Post by RC_ITR »

phantom784 wrote: post #20
jrockway wrote: post #15

I feel like the implication is that people prevent you from customizing stuff for ego reasons, but isn't it a lot of code and testing to implement the personalization UI? But thinking about it more, I suppose the answer is to let the users write their own clients. Netflix should have a JSON API that's a list of all the programs, and each record should contain a link to video file. They don't do that because of DRM an…

They could do that but you deeplink back into the Netflix app to actually watch to solve the DRM issue. Which I think shows that it's about more than just DRM. They want to control the experience.

Of course they do.

If they ever have any hope of improving margins, they need to argue that “our curation drives content discovery” to get better deals out of content providers.

Re: Non-Consensual Personalization

#64

Post by em-bee »

ryandrake wrote: post #12
doomrobo wrote: post #2

This is my main issue with so many services. The reason I don't use Instagram is because Instagram gives me no control over what I see. You want to look at pictures without seeing comments? Too bad. It doesn't matter that the top comment on one of the accounts I follow was an anti-Semitic jab at the account owner, I have to read it because Instagram knows what's best for me. Ditto YouTube comments & suggestions, Twit…

> and if I don't cede control I miss out on the primary means of social communication for people my age. What I do: Fight it by being part of the solution rather than contributing to the problem by continuing to use these platforms. This is obvious, but the only thing that makes it the “primary” means of communication is the people using it. Don’t be one of those people, and tell your friends the preferred way to get…

that doesn't work if you want to make new friends.

Re: Non-Consensual Personalization

#65

Post by firasd »

HunchedOver wrote: post #58
firasd wrote: post #43

I dig it though. I like telling Spotify what songs I like In fact my grocery app (BigBasket) suggests things based on when I bought them and how soon they run out.. I like that too And the proof of the pudding is in the results... I think machine learning on Youtube must have added at least $100B to its value

Spotify's insistence that it display Podcasts on the Home Screen is very frustrating, these are shows (often political) I've no intention of ever listening to or wanting to know even exist & there's no means of hiding them or telling Spotify I'm not interested. A quick online search shows many others equally frustrated by this "feature". I wouldn't mind so much if the product was free, but I'm paying and don't apprec…

That's kind of the opposite of personalization right? It's the 'cold start' where they've put the popular podcasts in your face.

But I get the general point you're making that they put every feature on the home screen as a feed rather than you having to explicitly go to a podcasts section. I suppose feed UIs like that should have a 'less like this' feature where it generally learns you're not into podcasts

Re: Non-Consensual Personalization

#66

Post by CamperBob2 »

martimarkov wrote: post #60
CamperBob2 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is the protocol documented anywhere?

https://developer.apple.com/documentation/applemusicapi

How does that let me stream the actual song? It provides access to metadata only, as far as I can tell.

Re: Non-Consensual Personalization

#67

Post by stickfigure »

titzer wrote: post #21
efitz wrote: post #17

I reject the framing. The problem isn’t the lack of personalizabilty(?) or customizability. The problem is that we’ve collectively allowed providers of content to warp the www into a state where they have the ability to control our experience. Consider what the web would look like if instead of html and JavaScript, it only consisted of a content description language devoid of any ability to control layout, fonts, col…

Right on! Imagine if the web served up content and I could write my own processors for it to lay it out however I want...man, that'd be great. But the Web became about branding the moment they introduced images and font choices. I remember designing a website for my local skate rink in 1997 that had a left navbar with buttons I did in photoshop and cut-n-paste javascript to add a lens flare when you moused-over them.…

This was at least the direction we were headed with XHTML. The source document could be something more akin to raw data and the presentation could be rendered on the client with an XSL stylesheet. Instead we got... something else.

Re: Non-Consensual Personalization

#68

Post by mdasen »

jrockway wrote: post #15

I feel like the implication is that people prevent you from customizing stuff for ego reasons, but isn't it a lot of code and testing to implement the personalization UI? But thinking about it more, I suppose the answer is to let the users write their own clients. Netflix should have a JSON API that's a list of all the programs, and each record should contain a link to video file. They don't do that because of DRM an…

> You could have the worst software and the best content and probably win

I definitely get where you're coming from. As a counter example, my parents aren't great with tech and have written off platforms with content they want because they find them annoying. For example, they find Amazon Video way too confusing. What's free? Why are there channels that aren't free that they already have somewhere else?

> I suppose the answer is to let the users write their own clients

Netflix definitely doesn't want this. They want people to turn on their TV and open Netflix. If people have a third-party client that can show Netflix content alongside content from HBO, Amazon, Apple, and Disney, people might start watching their competitors more.

Not only that, but Netflix wants to be able to push your viewing in certain ways. If everyone starts watching a show at the same time, it can create buzz. Netflix's big promotion of Squid Game got to that critical mass for buzz to happen.

If they're able to determine what comes up where in the UI, they can also prioritize shows that are cheap for them. Getting someone interested in an owned show is better than getting someone interested in a show that they're renting from a third party.

That said, there are third party UIs like JustWatch that allow you to integrate with multiple services. We also saw Movie of the Night (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29862588) featured here a little while back offering an API and it does offer links to shows in Netflix.

I think the issue is that it takes work to build a third-party UI and it takes money to actually collect the data (or pay someone else for the data) while the streaming companies aren't totally happy about giving you that data.

Really, everyone is looking for an edge. Google wants their Android TV to serve you ads for shows. They want Hulu to pay them money for them to push Hulu shows in their UI even if you don't have Hulu. Roku wants to sell advertising space on their Home Screen. Every content provider would love to become your primary destination while you ignore the other apps on your system and forget that they have content too.

Re: Non-Consensual Personalization

#69

Post by selcuka »

crooked-v wrote: post #45
anonymousiam wrote: post #42

I actually cancelled Netflix a few years ago because of this. Then my mobile carrier (T-Mobile) offered me an almost-free subscription, so I joined back. Maybe it's my paranoid streak, but it almost seemed as though Netflix was not just offering me content that their AI thought I would enjoy, but they were progressively offering me content that was right on the edge of what my value system would accept -- as though t…

I think 'reprogramming' is a stretch, but I definitely noticed a gradual slide in actively exposed content from the stuff I actually wanted to watch towards mockbusters and foreign imports, and it became increasingly obvious they were trying to get me to watch stuff that was cheap to license, instead of the backlog of quality films I was used to from the DVD days.

I think the aim is to get you out of your comfort zone, so that you can find more things to watch and don't cancel your subscription.

Re: Non-Consensual Personalization

#70

Post by shmde »

HunchedOver wrote: post #58
firasd wrote: post #43

I dig it though. I like telling Spotify what songs I like In fact my grocery app (BigBasket) suggests things based on when I bought them and how soon they run out.. I like that too And the proof of the pudding is in the results... I think machine learning on Youtube must have added at least $100B to its value

Spotify's insistence that it display Podcasts on the Home Screen is very frustrating, these are shows (often political) I've no intention of ever listening to or wanting to know even exist & there's no means of hiding them or telling Spotify I'm not interested. A quick online search shows many others equally frustrated by this "feature". I wouldn't mind so much if the product was free, but I'm paying and don't apprec…

> Spotify's insistence that it display Podcasts on the Home Screen is very frustrating.

100%. In the top 7 Rows, the 1st,3rd, 5th rows are Spotify displaying me podcasts about things I don't care about. I use Spotify to just listen to music but its frustrating to see top rows just filled with podcasts. I thought of giving a random podcast a chance, big mistake. Now it just displays me shows related to it and I cannot even turn it off in settings. I don't understand this aggressive push by spotify on promoting Podcasts.

Post reply on HN