881–890 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But it's not sticky and it's easy to miss when it forces you back to For You. Less of a problem on desktop because you can write a trivial extension to force Following, but not an option on mobile, unfortunately. Following IS sorted by time, though.
Hm it Is sticky for me. On Twitter.com
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The fallacy of false equivalence systematized in code. Now one side can spew as much disinfo and incitement to violence as it likes, and any algorithm change that prevents this shit from getting amplified will be rejected as bias. BSaaS = Both Sides as a Service
I don't see an unbiased way to tell which "side" releases more disinformation and incitement to violence. Even deciding what counts as disinformation is hard (e.g. does it have to be literally false or just cause false beliefs in the reader?).
It turns out, according to the FBI (which is a conservative organization historically and exclusively run by conservatives), right wing extremism and violence is in fact the biggest domestic terror threat in the US, and it's currently growing [1]. FBI Director Wray gave this testimony after a right wing domestic terror attack was carried out that aimed to topple the US government. Not much has changed since then [2]. Since the former President's indictment the other day, the right-wing violent rhetoric has also ratcheted up a notch, so we can expect right-wing violence to follow.
Notably, we can confidently say this doesn't happen on the left, as when Hillary lost they did not launch an assault against the Capitol as the right did. Instead, they knit pink hats and had a march.
(PS before anyone whattabouts the George Floyd protests, the FBI doesn't see them the same way [3])
https://apnews.com/article/fbi-chris-wray-testify-capitol-ri...
https://news.yahoo.com/right-wing-extremists-responsible-for...
https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/fbi-dhs-domestic-terrori...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sounds like moving fast and adjusting to user feedback, usually something commendable in tech, right?
More like rewarding someone for putting out a fire that they started. Not exactly a model of good governance.
Great! But nothing is going to change until people realize that the problem is the feedback loop . It's not the recommendation engine itself, it's the fact that there's no way "out" of the feed that the engine produces. It recommends you stuff, you have little choice but to engage with it, and then it trains on that information . This is the problem with most of social media today. It is a very well known problem in…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Before I deliberately locked myself out of it (well before Musk), I asked for my data. They classify me as: * speaks Indonesian Interested in: * Beer * Cricket * DJs * Dance * Enterprise software * Horror * NFL football * South America And aged either between 13-54 or (and?) over 65 Other than the age (I'm neither under 13 nor between 55-64), everything I've listed is incorrect. On that basis, they'd probably call me…
Aren't "enterprise software" and "horror" the same thing?
I try to avoid both, when I can. :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I had to go to the second page to find this. I completely agree. I clicked this thread looking forward to seeing some intelligent discussion of the merits of the source and issues/interesting tidbits, instead I see a bunch of Elon Musk ranting and complaining and pointing out drive-by poor pull requests issues. I really wish the adults would start to talk.
I would definitely love a techy community that focused on technology like the hackernews of 10 years ago. If you know of one then please link me to it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So many unnecessarily cynical takes here. Let's say you were in charge of a large legacy system that some segment of customers complain about it not working for them as well as other segments. How would you know whether their complaints are valid unless you measured it? You have to know first. So measure it.
Elon has said he wanted more reach and experimented with getting it. He also loves attention and tweets a ton. There’s benefit of the doubt then there’s just… whatever the polar opposite of that is.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ahh, the group of Elons. I was wondering why I see so many tweets by him, and what his "Group's" impression quote is. This is actually pretty hilarious.
Thankfully they haven't added a "no mute Elon" feature. Yet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So they could pretend to be open. It's the "Open"AI model. Open-washing?
This is a very cynical take. They should be commended for publishing recommendation code at all, which no other major social network does.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is transparency theatre, not actual transparency. There's no way to actually use this limited release to understand how or why any tweet is boosted, so we're in exactly the same boat we were in yesterday.
I did find the article more enlightening than the source code. I always suspected the quality of a tweet did not factor in to its promotion, only its engagement, and now they have confirmed this to be the case. Now I understand better why twitter seems to be filled with people angrily retweeting what I consider to be low quality clickbait tweets. As long as they don’t try to tackle tweet quality at all separately fro…
We pretty much knew this is how all social media works, becuase a) engagement is what they want, why wouldn't they be optimizing for it, and b) how else might you measure 'quality'? Back when this started, I have no trouble believing some well-intentioned engineers thought that engagement was a good proxy for quality. A bunch of users give it the "like", isn't that a collective assessment of quality? Who is to say what quality is, overruling the users in aggregate?
I agree it has the negative effects you mention; and I've read lots of people writing about this, it's of course not a new observation.
But I agree it's good to have an explanation of what's going on, even when parts of are what we basically knew was happening on all social media networks. confirmed is better than "basically knew", for understanding how these things that effect our experiences (and our society) work.