for those of you that have a negative association with "the algorithm" can you explain what it is that you don't like?
-
for those of you that have a negative association with "the algorithm" can you explain what it is that you don't like?
-
matt at oslo dot townreplied to wakest ⁂ last edited by
@liaizon My problem isn't with the existence of an algorithm, it's when the algorithm is used to foster engagement of a negative persuasion.
For example; my YouTube recommendations are an alogorithm and it's very useful for finding content to watch.
On the flip side; Instagram order comments on Reels + Facebook posts sorted "For you" and often they are negative views pushed to you so you feel the need to react or to respond to that content.
-
wakest ⁂replied to matt at oslo dot town last edited by
@matt I guess my point in posting this was to discuss how the negativity about algorithms have nothing to do with algorithms and everything to do with who has control of what you see and how you see it. I wish I had a way to surface more conversations in the area of interests I hold and those things are not static and forever changing
-
@liaizon the manipulation of attention for profit, capturing eyeballs
-
@h so if an algorithm is entirely under your control or the control of someone you trust you then dont have any issue with it?
-
@liaizon it's interesting, because i want to say that i prefer self-curated chronological feeds entirely (and i do to some level) but i also like how algorithms can surface new and exciting things, so yes, probably?
-
@h I thought I liked chronological feeds for a long time but I am increasingly feeling like they are actually the worst ordering of content if you are following more then like 50 people.
-
@liaizon
The fact that it is opaque and (presumably) represents goals and values that don't align with mine. Gimme a GUI where I can tweak my own algorithm (and ideally delve deeper into the source code should I wish) and I'm on board. -
@da5nsy so how do you feel about how Bluesky is doing algorithms?
-
@liaizon @matt this kind of reads like you're asking a question when you already have made up your own answer for the people answering. Which feels a bit disingenuous tbh.
It boils down to these algorithms being controlled and designed by people who want things from you that you may not wish yourself. I have no issue with filtering and content organization algorithms if I'm actually in control of them. If you wish to discuss which kind of algorithms would qualify for that, then ask for that.
-
@vanderZwan @liaizon for me the thing is, most people who criticize "algorithms" do it categorically and don't even consider the possibility of controlling them or that they could work in the user's interests. Which this question highlights
-
@powersource @liaizon but people don't question "algorithms", they question "The Algorithm". Which has quite a specific meaning.
Keep in mind that this discussion is taking place in a tech-savvy bubble. For most people 99% of the computer is a black box, meaning that using them involves even more blind trust than it does for us. Being categorically paranoid is honestly a very reasonable thing to do when stuck in that situation.
-
@vanderZwan @powersource I know the way I phrased the question was a bit clickbaity but my intention was to see a bit of how charged the term is. I think that "the algorithm" in the sense that the capitalist media landscape is made is also completely fucked and I dont mean to put any blame on people for being paranoid that this thing we are talking about it controlling us in a negative way. I guess I wanted to work on my own arguments for defending a "good algorithm"