3 ms·

For all that "don't read the comments" seems to be common knowledge in the tech community, we have a collective blind spot about the product design choices we m

For all that "don't read the comments" seems to be common knowledge in the tech community, we have a collective blind spot about the product design choices we make that amplify annonymous, un-vetted, un-sourced claims. Almost all our tech media products default to treating things as "this is good enough to broadcast to the world until someone proves we should take it down" instead of defaulting to "this is probably low-value dreck that's not worth much distribution." This is certainly easier from a product design perspective... but does it really make sense?

giantg2 6y ago
What would a sensible alternative be?
- postmeta 6y ago
  No recommendations or notifications without liability.
  - giantg2 6y ago
    I don't think think this really solves the issue of content quality like the original comment was addressing. However, I do think it's a step in the right direction and makes sense. After all, if your platform is promoting specific content by your own actions/volition, then it's no longer just content posted by some user, but it's now being used or reposted/linked by the company that owns the platform for monetary gain (I would guess ToS would solidify this with some boilerplate statement saying they can use your content to make money and to promote the platform etc).
- okennedy 6y ago
  Decouple discovery (e.g., suggesting posts from new users or paid ads) from the protections afforded to dumb carriers/hosting services (i.e., posts received from users you follow or are engaged in a discussion with).
  - giantg2 6y ago
    Are you basically saying to remove protections from platforms that take an active role in the content propagation, Like Facebook ranking algorithms? If so, I agree that this would be a step in the right direction. But what paradigm replaces the original comment's statement that platforms treat all content as good instead of vetting it for quality? I'm skeptical of how we could have a system that vets for quality without introducing more/other issues. That's what I wanted to learn more about.

giantg2 6y ago

What would a sensible alternative be?

postmeta 6y ago
No recommendations or notifications without liability.
- giantg2 6y ago
  I don't think think this really solves the issue of content quality like the original comment was addressing. However, I do think it's a step in the right direction and makes sense. After all, if your platform is promoting specific content by your own actions/volition, then it's no longer just content posted by some user, but it's now being used or reposted/linked by the company that owns the platform for monetary gain (I would guess ToS would solidify this with some boilerplate statement saying they can use your content to make money and to promote the platform etc).
okennedy 6y ago
Decouple discovery (e.g., suggesting posts from new users or paid ads) from the protections afforded to dumb carriers/hosting services (i.e., posts received from users you follow or are engaged in a discussion with).
- giantg2 6y ago
  Are you basically saying to remove protections from platforms that take an active role in the content propagation, Like Facebook ranking algorithms? If so, I agree that this would be a step in the right direction. But what paradigm replaces the original comment's statement that platforms treat all content as good instead of vetting it for quality? I'm skeptical of how we could have a system that vets for quality without introducing more/other issues. That's what I wanted to learn more about.