4 ms·

> heterogeneous moderation Does this mean users sort themselves into filter bubbles rather than having algorithms do it for them?

by jl6 6y ago

packetlost 6y ago
Yes
sammorrowdrums 6y ago
There's a bit more interest in specific shared interest servers (like writing, being a Roman Catholic, being a furry, photography for example), so while yes they are bubbles, they aren't necessarily organised around holding specific political views. Also you can join multiple servers. Also there are benefits of the bubbles in this context as while you may not be being exposed to all content, nasty groups can't as easily spread content as they get blocked by most servers, so I think it does reduce radicalisation. Also, within servers that don't block each other, you can bring on federated content from any of them, and that can actually be horizon broadening too, but not in the frequently antagonistic way of Facebook or Twitter. At least in my personal experience.
kixiQu 6y ago
No. "Filter bubble" is a term with a particular meaning: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filter_bubble https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filter_bubble Mastodon displays content only chronologically, so it's not a relevant term. Now, do people's choices of social association determine what they see? Of course, but... it's social media, so that's priced in, frankly.
- kstrauser 6y ago
  That's a good point. Any social media that doesn't pair you up with random strangers is going to put you in a bit of a bubble because you choose who you're going to hang out with, both online and in real life.
  - akiselev 6y ago
    Filter bubbles are more pernicious than that because even if someone has a large and diverse social network, search algorithms can shoehorn them into a smaller bubble where it's much harder to get a diverse set of honest information when a viewpoint is challenged by that social network. It's an orthogonal concern to social bubbles unless that individual doesn't use search engines to consume content, instead getting it all curated through a facebook feed or similar. For example, a borderline far right extremist might consume a bunch of OAN and Breitbart type sources so the search engines begin to cater their results for that demographic. When a sudden event happens like the Capitol riots, their results might look like a bunch of Q conspiracy crap when they search for "capitol riot" instead of more honest media sources that might be enough to do a self-deprogramming (I'm not sure if filter bubbles have become so extreme, just throwing out a hypothetical). Even if they have a bunch of friends respectfully pointing out the faults in their logic, the filter bubble might make it impossible to do the independent research that would cement a reversal.
eitland 6y ago
mountainb had a very good explanation from a few days ago: > 'Bubbles' are a pejorative way of just saying 'local communities.' Source: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25777814 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25777814
Barrin92 6y ago
filter bubble has to be the worst word ever invented. What people actually apply this label to today is certainly almost always people exercising freedom of association of people aligning along common interests. Every political organisation, every civic group, every church, every coherent community by definition is a filter bubble, and that's a perfectly fine thing. As Madison put it "Extend the sphere, and you take in a greater variety of parties and interests; you make it less probable that a majority of the whole will have a common motive to invade the rights of other citizens; or if such a common motive exists, it will be more difficult for all who feel it to discover their own strength, and to act in unison with each other. Besides other impediments, it may be remarked, that where there is a consciousness of unjust or dishonorable purposes, a communication is always checked by distrust, in proportion to the number whose concurrence is necessary."
- tlavoie 6y ago
  One difference perhaps is that the term as used typically refers to algorithmic associations defined for, and out of the control of the user. When you choose what Fediverse instance you use, or what other people to follow, you're getting what you asked for. When it's something else based on ad targeting and an opaque mechanism, it's a bubble you're in without your informed input.
- cma 6y ago
  Madison wasn't describing an opaque algorithm feeding back based on your actions to optimize for something against your best interest or desires.
- earthboundkid 6y ago
  “Virtue signaling” is a much dumber and worse term. “Hypocrisy” is a more coherent and useful concept and we’ve been using it since a Jewish religious leader popularized it thousands of years ago. “Virtue signaling” is hypocrisy without the hidden vice. It just means “I don’t like the values you endorse” but in nerd speech.
- nathias 6y ago
  It's not the same, bubbles refer to the epistemological aspect, you can be part of local communities but don't let them be your only source of knowledge.
syshum 6y ago
In reality what you call "filter bubbles" is how human existence was for our entire history before social media, even on the internet IRC, Internet Forums, BBS' etc where all often topic centrist and heavily moderated by the community members of those communities. The "platforms" of those days where the underlying software and protocals not a for-profit company. phpBB, vBullitien, freenode, etc etc etc That was IMO the golden age of the internet. Modern Social Media "platforms" have brought about the Poo Age of the internet. HN is somewhat of a throw back to that golden age as well before the internet you had social clubs that were every topic driven, a Community Sports League, a car club, a motorcycle club, LAN parties for gaming, even In Person physical Linux Users groups....

> heterogeneous moderation Does this mean users sort themselves into filter bubbles rather than having algorithms do it for them?

by jl6 6y ago

> heterogeneous moderation Does this mean users sort themselves into filter bubbles rather than having algorithms do it for them?

packetlost 6y ago

Yes

sammorrowdrums 6y ago

There's a bit more interest in specific shared interest servers (like writing, being a Roman Catholic, being a furry, photography for example), so while yes they are bubbles, they aren't necessarily organised around holding specific political views. Also you can join multiple servers. Also there are benefits of the bubbles in this context as while you may not be being exposed to all content, nasty groups can't as easily spread content as they get blocked by most servers, so I think it does reduce radicalisation. Also, within servers that don't block each other, you can bring on federated content from any of them, and that can actually be horizon broadening too, but not in the frequently antagonistic way of Facebook or Twitter. At least in my personal experience.

kixiQu 6y ago

No. "Filter bubble" is a term with a particular meaning: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filter_bubble https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filter_bubble Mastodon displays content only chronologically, so it's not a relevant term. Now, do people's choices of social association determine what they see? Of course, but... it's social media, so that's priced in, frankly.

kstrauser 6y ago
That's a good point. Any social media that doesn't pair you up with random strangers is going to put you in a bit of a bubble because you choose who you're going to hang out with, both online and in real life.
- akiselev 6y ago
  Filter bubbles are more pernicious than that because even if someone has a large and diverse social network, search algorithms can shoehorn them into a smaller bubble where it's much harder to get a diverse set of honest information when a viewpoint is challenged by that social network. It's an orthogonal concern to social bubbles unless that individual doesn't use search engines to consume content, instead getting it all curated through a facebook feed or similar. For example, a borderline far right extremist might consume a bunch of OAN and Breitbart type sources so the search engines begin to cater their results for that demographic. When a sudden event happens like the Capitol riots, their results might look like a bunch of Q conspiracy crap when they search for "capitol riot" instead of more honest media sources that might be enough to do a self-deprogramming (I'm not sure if filter bubbles have become so extreme, just throwing out a hypothetical). Even if they have a bunch of friends respectfully pointing out the faults in their logic, the filter bubble might make it impossible to do the independent research that would cement a reversal.

eitland 6y ago

mountainb had a very good explanation from a few days ago: > 'Bubbles' are a pejorative way of just saying 'local communities.' Source: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25777814 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25777814

Barrin92 6y ago

filter bubble has to be the worst word ever invented. What people actually apply this label to today is certainly almost always people exercising freedom of association of people aligning along common interests. Every political organisation, every civic group, every church, every coherent community by definition is a filter bubble, and that's a perfectly fine thing. As Madison put it "Extend the sphere, and you take in a greater variety of parties and interests; you make it less probable that a majority of the whole will have a common motive to invade the rights of other citizens; or if such a common motive exists, it will be more difficult for all who feel it to discover their own strength, and to act in unison with each other. Besides other impediments, it may be remarked, that where there is a consciousness of unjust or dishonorable purposes, a communication is always checked by distrust, in proportion to the number whose concurrence is necessary."

tlavoie 6y ago
One difference perhaps is that the term as used typically refers to algorithmic associations defined for, and out of the control of the user. When you choose what Fediverse instance you use, or what other people to follow, you're getting what you asked for. When it's something else based on ad targeting and an opaque mechanism, it's a bubble you're in without your informed input.
cma 6y ago
Madison wasn't describing an opaque algorithm feeding back based on your actions to optimize for something against your best interest or desires.
earthboundkid 6y ago
“Virtue signaling” is a much dumber and worse term. “Hypocrisy” is a more coherent and useful concept and we’ve been using it since a Jewish religious leader popularized it thousands of years ago. “Virtue signaling” is hypocrisy without the hidden vice. It just means “I don’t like the values you endorse” but in nerd speech.
nathias 6y ago
It's not the same, bubbles refer to the epistemological aspect, you can be part of local communities but don't let them be your only source of knowledge.

syshum 6y ago

In reality what you call "filter bubbles" is how human existence was for our entire history before social media, even on the internet IRC, Internet Forums, BBS' etc where all often topic centrist and heavily moderated by the community members of those communities. The "platforms" of those days where the underlying software and protocals not a for-profit company. phpBB, vBullitien, freenode, etc etc etc That was IMO the golden age of the internet. Modern Social Media "platforms" have brought about the Poo Age of the internet. HN is somewhat of a throw back to that golden age as well before the internet you had social clubs that were every topic driven, a Community Sports League, a car club, a motorcycle club, LAN parties for gaming, even In Person physical Linux Users groups....