3 ms·

> Chronological is just one ordering. Why are you so attached to it? This is a very deep question you’re asking, and I don’t know the answer. But, this boat on

> Chronological is just one ordering. Why are you so attached to it? This is a very deep question you’re asking, and I don’t know the answer. But, this boat only goes in one direction so let’s make the best of it. But seriously, sure other sorting methods are useful. I would like to have many options, but I can’t think of a better default for this use case. Can you? > ...as demonstrated by their engagement, prefer the algorithmic model. You just don’t understand my point. Maybe read it again. I dunno. But ... As demonstrated by their engagement, people prefer doing whatever their boss tells them to do. As demonstrated by their engagement, people don’t actually like sex very much at all.

_wmd 8y ago
I'd offer you one blindingly obvious explanation for why it's putrid: because it is a machine deciding which of my human relationships I should pay the most attention to. Machines can't do that, silly. They can only promote hate speech with 100 comments and lolcat pictures with 100 likes. The only option is for them to take a back seat and present an ordering that is semantically meaningful to the human computer operating the tool -- the only one qualified to perform any kind of filtering and sorting. "Relevance ranking" in social networks is a result of engineers having zero clue what applications they're working on, but that's just typical IT people divorced from reality for you. As you said, they find it acceptable because it's written in Angular v7 and uses ML and A/B testing revealed a 3.2% increase in clicks. The idea of the software industry helping real relationships is in general hilariously contradictory (but of course there are exceptions!)
jgtrosh 8y ago
> > ...as demonstrated by their engagement, prefer the algorithmic model. > > […] > > As demonstrated by their engagement, people prefer doing whatever their boss tells them to do. Engagement means people are engaging more with non-chronological feeds than with chronological ones. This isn't just about blindly accepting what you are given, it's also about caring more for pertinence than order.

_wmd 8y ago

I'd offer you one blindingly obvious explanation for why it's putrid: because it is a machine deciding which of my human relationships I should pay the most attention to. Machines can't do that, silly. They can only promote hate speech with 100 comments and lolcat pictures with 100 likes. The only option is for them to take a back seat and present an ordering that is semantically meaningful to the human computer operating the tool -- the only one qualified to perform any kind of filtering and sorting. "Relevance ranking" in social networks is a result of engineers having zero clue what applications they're working on, but that's just typical IT people divorced from reality for you. As you said, they find it acceptable because it's written in Angular v7 and uses ML and A/B testing revealed a 3.2% increase in clicks. The idea of the software industry helping real relationships is in general hilariously contradictory (but of course there are exceptions!)

jgtrosh 8y ago

> > ...as demonstrated by their engagement, prefer the algorithmic model. > > […] > > As demonstrated by their engagement, people prefer doing whatever their boss tells them to do. Engagement means people are engaging more with non-chronological feeds than with chronological ones. This isn't just about blindly accepting what you are given, it's also about caring more for pertinence than order.