Facebook removed the news feed algorithm in an experiment • Hacker News Board

Re: Facebook removed the news feed algorithm in an experiment

#91

Post by threeseed » Wed, Oct 27, 2021, 8:47 PM UTC

saghm wrote: post #69

selwynii wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But people don't like new material. The top comment mentions people hiding posts from pages they don't follow - alternatively, that's called showing brand new content you haven't seen before. Opposing material suggests a binary, sure that makes some sense in a US centric political spectrum, but what's the opposing viewpoint to my friends photo from hiking last weekend? Geographically nearby could mean my neighbor 5 d…

> Chronological feeds are how you end up with news teams spamming posts every three minutes, and you having to hit the hide button every time Or you just stop following the spammy ones

But then like the article says you are spending all your time curating the experience.

People don't want Facebook to be a chore.

Re: Facebook removed the news feed algorithm in an experiment

#92

Post by bluGill » Wed, Oct 27, 2021, 8:47 PM UTC

mrweasel wrote: post #76

d3vmax wrote: post #4

Have a chronological time series newsfeed only from friends. Once you have caught up show the recommended / algo posts. + Facebook should allow you to go filter and show posts using a calendar. Like all post from X date to Y date, from this location / friends. It will actually improve usage. Miss the old photo sharing days.

The last year or so I was on Facebook I had basically hidden or otherwise removed anything that wasn't posted by a friend directly. It would take me around five minutes or less to scroll through everything once a week. The problem is that if Facebook implemented this site wide engagement would drop dramatically. No one really posts to Facebook anymore, people love it when you do, because it's actually kinda novel.

I've started doing that, but the problem is facebook will prefer to hide thing my friends are doing and showing me more of the garbage others are sharing. Hiding everything someone shares makes things better, but I've been doing that for a month and still see tons of posts that people have shared. (some people share 40 things per day, they need to get a life)

Facebook doesn't actually hide things when you make them show none from X. I see many of those things after I hide all them.

Re: Facebook removed the news feed algorithm in an experiment

#93

Post by yodsanklai » Wed, Oct 27, 2021, 8:49 PM UTC

I'm under the impression that people are getting irrationally afraid of "algorithms". Like if some evil AI is controlling people mind.

People wants to read the stuff they are interested in. No algorithm is forcing people to watch fox news for instance.

That being said, FB should give the option to disable the news feed algorithm (or to have several version to choose from maybe), if that makes people happy.

Re: Facebook removed the news feed algorithm in an experiment

#94

Post by bluGill » Wed, Oct 27, 2021, 8:49 PM UTC

laylomo2 wrote: post #78

Imagine being able to choose your own algorithm. I’d want reverse chronological most of the time. And occasionally I might check out some of the other AI powered ones too. Imagine even having that choice at all.

What I really want is only first part posts. If you didn't write the status or take the picture yourself, then I don't want to see it.

Re: Facebook removed the news feed algorithm in an experiment

#95

Post by suzzer99 » Wed, Oct 27, 2021, 8:50 PM UTC

azinman2 wrote: post #46

munk-a wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not all automated curation is built equal and boiling it down to just one thing really confuses things. I absolutely adore YouTube's automated curation since the primary goal there is just to steer me to things I'll find interesting - the ads are present on all content and so YT just wants to keep me on the platform for as long as possible. When it comes to Facebook it always feels like I'm being steered towards topi…

YTs recommendations are infamous for getting people radicalized, into conspiracy theories, and filled with misinformation.

YT continues to push Jordan Peterson videos on me even though I've downvoted them many times. Other friends report the same thing.

I think the algorithm has figured out that if it can get people into JP, there's a chance they go down into more extreme rabbit holes and thus become super-engaged. So it's worth it for the algorithm to keep trying to push JP even on people who don't seem interested at first.

Re: Facebook removed the news feed algorithm in an experiment

#96

Post by KaiserPro » Wed, Oct 27, 2021, 8:52 PM UTC

mikem170 wrote: post #26

KaiserPro wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

given that the algorithm is never going to be as effective as an editorial department, I don't understand the "total narrative control" argument. Facebook and instagram are social phase locked loops. Open a new instagram account, search for content that you like, like them, then what how it shove more/similar stuff into your feed. Now pivot to a different subject, only like that, and watch how your feed moves to that…

Putting users into echo chambers is not narrative control? They could have made the algorithm so it showed users brand new different material, or opposing material, or more details, or related material from friends instead of corporations, or from people geographically nearby, or chronological, or let users find their own material and/or build their own feeds. Instead of any of that they show them similar material, l…

> so it showed users brand new different material, or opposing material

Brand new, yes, facebook is biased to new stuff. Its just there is a high incentive to repost old shit, because spammers know its effective.

Opposing material? no, that requires comprehensive understanding of the context of the share, the content of the material and the target audience's overton window.

> let users find their own material and/or build their own feeds.

virtually nobody does this, or indeed wants to do it. What's more its very rare that anyone is any good at it (hence why people don't subscribe to news wire services)

also, the research emphatically underscores this. People hunt more, and are less engaged. its more effort.

Re: Facebook removed the news feed algorithm in an experiment

#97

Post by civilized » Wed, Oct 27, 2021, 8:56 PM UTC

lanerobertlane wrote: post #32

When people argue against the 'news feed algorithm' they mean anything other than a reverse chronological feed of posts from the people they follow. status updates, and interactions between people/pages you both follow. This article mentions that they turned the news feed off but people were still hiding posts from pages they don't follow, which friends had commented on. These shouldn't appear in a news feed that is…

And as Twitter shows, it's not hard to offer both options and let users choose.

Twitter also implemented a timer so that, if you choose simple reverse chron, it forces you back into the ranking algorithm after a certain period of time.

Hmm, I wonder why they'd go to the trouble to do that? Maybe these social networks have motivations that override user experience?

Re: Facebook removed the news feed algorithm in an experiment

#98

Post by dmix » Wed, Oct 27, 2021, 8:57 PM UTC

yodsanklai wrote: post #93

I'm under the impression that people are getting irrationally afraid of "algorithms". Like if some evil AI is controlling people mind. People wants to read the stuff they are interested in. No algorithm is forcing people to watch fox news for instance. That being said, FB should give the option to disable the news feed algorithm (or to have several version to choose from maybe), if that makes people happy.

Twitter finally returned the option to make the feed chronological again and I’m starting to like Twitter a lot more again. It was way more political and contentious with the smart feed on.

FB should explore these options more. It sounds like there has to be more done here than just turning off the smart feed entirely.

Re: Facebook removed the news feed algorithm in an experiment

#99

Post by jaywalk » Wed, Oct 27, 2021, 8:59 PM UTC

threeseed wrote: post #81

jaywalk wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems Facebook is so far up their own ass that they actually think this "no algorithm" test they did is what people are clamoring for.

Except that it is exactly what people have been asking for: Simple reverse chronological order feed with no ranking.

Did you even read the comment I replied to? BS like "we're throwing this post in your feed because one of your friends liked/commented on it" is not part of what people have been asking for, but that was still part of their "no algorithm" test.

All they did was get rid of the ranking, but that's only part of the issue.

Re: Facebook removed the news feed algorithm in an experiment

#100

Post by sam0x17 » Wed, Oct 27, 2021, 9:03 PM UTC

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #74

lanerobertlane wrote: post #32

When people argue against the 'news feed algorithm' they mean anything other than a reverse chronological feed of posts from the people they follow. status updates, and interactions between people/pages you both follow. This article mentions that they turned the news feed off but people were still hiding posts from pages they don't follow, which friends had commented on. These shouldn't appear in a news feed that is…

100% agree. In addition, look at their metrics. When it comes to "meaningful social interaction", calling Uncle Joey a stupid ass because he posted another semi-racist Obama meme is the same as telling Cousin Jane you like her baby pics. I should HOPE "meaningful social interactions" go down with a reverse-chron, friends-only feed.

Aren't those both equally meaningless? Maybe this is why I don't participate in social media anymore XD