4 ms·
They are also a spam filter. It's not just an index of whats relevant, but removal of what maliciously appears to be relevant at first glance.
by basch 7y ago
They are also a spam filter. It's not just an index of whats relevant, but removal of what maliciously appears to be relevant at first glance.
- izendejas 7y agoThis. Everyone's missing the point of a search engine. We're talking about billions of pages and if not ranked (authority is a good hueristic), filtered (de-ranked), etc then good luck finding valuable information because everyone is gaming the systems to improve their ranking. I think this is part of the reason you get a lot of fake news on social media. It's a constant stream of information (a new dimension of time has been added to the ranking, basically) that needs to be ranked and with humans in the loop, there's no way to do this very easily without filtering for noise and outright malicious content.
- luxuryballs 7y agoThe reverse is a problem too, Google filtering things out based on their political leanings in an attempt to shape public opinion.
- Nasrudith 7y agoI haven't seen any examples which were anything other than runaway persecution complexes of those who found their world view was less popular than they believed - which were greeted with exasperation by testifying engineers who had to explain how absurdly unscaleable it would be to do it manually.
- aslaan 7y agohttps://gohmert.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=399712 https://gohmert.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentI...
- basch 7y agoi disagree that there isnt a way, just that nobodies tried a good one yet. take reddit for example. it should be very easy to establish a few voters who make "good" decisions, and then extrapolate their good decisions based on people with similar voting patterns. it would combine a million monkeys with typewriters with expert meritocracy. you want different sorting, sort by different experts until you get the results you want. it seems every platform is too busy fighting noise to focus on amplifying signal, or are focused on teaching machines to do the entire task, instead of using machines to multiply the efficiency of people with taste who can make a good judgement call with regard to whether something is novel or or pseudo-intellectual. Not to pick on them, but I would suspect an expert to be better at deranking aeon/brainpickings type clickbait than an eruditelike ai, if only because humans can still more easily determine if someone is making an actual worthwhile point, vs repeating a platitude, conventional wisdom, or something hollow.
- abathur 7y agoIt should, but if anyone knows who these kingmakers are, it's still probably just a matter of time before they accrue enough power for it to be worth someone's time to at least try to track them down and manipulate their decisions (bribe, blackmail, sponsor, send free trials, target with marketing/propaganda campaigns, etc.)
- basch 7y agoWho says it even has the same kingmakers every day? Slashdot solved that part of metamoderation two decades ago. A person might be an expert in cars but not horses. A car expert might be superseded . The seed data creators could be a fluid thing.