3 ms·

What you are describing is a literal filter bubble, where very soon your only exposure to content will be seeing content you are already liking, ideas you are a

by vntok 7y ago

What you are describing is a literal filter bubble, where very soon your only exposure to content will be seeing content you are already liking, ideas you are already adhering to, people you are already looking to. A bubble where ideas and people that you and people like yourself don't like automagically get hidden from you so that you never get exposed to them. A nightmare.

dheera 7y ago
I think this can be done a little more intelligently. Up/downvotes should be based on the structure of the site and more so than the meaning of the content. An downvote should not mean "I disagree with this author" but rather "this site was useless spam" or "I derived no information from this site because it threw 5 popups in my face". Or if I downvote a bunch of paywall sites it should stop showing me paywall sites. We're looking for a spam filter, basically.
- brianpgordon 7y ago
  > An downvote should not mean "I disagree with this author" but rather "this site was useless spam" How would you tell them apart? If you could identify abusive site formats mechanically anyway why even solicit votes?
  - dheera 7y ago
    It's still relative. I hate paywalls, some people may prefer to just pay. I hate popups with a passion, so much that I will leave the site, but Average Joe probably just clicks them away.
- hombre_fatal 7y ago
  What you're proposing in this comment doesn't even work on Reddit/HN. People don't even agree what each star represents in 5-star rating systems.
  - dheera 7y ago
    That's because those rating systems naively apply the ratings across the entire population. The average of the star ratings should be weighted by the normalized dot product of each rater's style and your rating style, or the similarity between each rater and you. A 0-star rating from someone whose preferences are orthogonal to you should not influence the average rating you see.

by vntok 7y ago

dheera 7y ago

I think this can be done a little more intelligently. Up/downvotes should be based on the structure of the site and more so than the meaning of the content. An downvote should not mean "I disagree with this author" but rather "this site was useless spam" or "I derived no information from this site because it threw 5 popups in my face". Or if I downvote a bunch of paywall sites it should stop showing me paywall sites. We're looking for a spam filter, basically.

brianpgordon 7y ago
> An downvote should not mean "I disagree with this author" but rather "this site was useless spam" How would you tell them apart? If you could identify abusive site formats mechanically anyway why even solicit votes?
- dheera 7y ago
  It's still relative. I hate paywalls, some people may prefer to just pay. I hate popups with a passion, so much that I will leave the site, but Average Joe probably just clicks them away.
hombre_fatal 7y ago
What you're proposing in this comment doesn't even work on Reddit/HN. People don't even agree what each star represents in 5-star rating systems.
- dheera 7y ago
  That's because those rating systems naively apply the ratings across the entire population. The average of the star ratings should be weighted by the normalized dot product of each rater's style and your rating style, or the similarity between each rater and you. A 0-star rating from someone whose preferences are orthogonal to you should not influence the average rating you see.