2 ms·
If you never get to see what the computer thinks you are not going to like, as soon as its model of you becomes slightly wrong, you will never have the chance o
by bravura 15y ago
If you never get to see what the computer thinks you are not going to like, as soon as its model of you becomes slightly wrong, you will never have the chance of correcting it and getting to see the good stuff.
This is an interesting technical objection. I am not sure that it is necessarily true, though. If I properly weigh exploration (vs. exploitation), and I present related users with stochastic feeds, then the system can explore things it didn't realize that I might like.
Not that I think genetic algorithms are useful in general, but a genetic algorithm would be useful in this specific circumstance. If I engage in K discussions when the feed is driven by exploitation, but I engage in 2K discussions when the feed is driven by more exploration, then I will prefer explorative feeds. So I believe it would be possible to escape local minima.
- ericwaller 15y agoQuick aside, if you haven't seen this TED talk, definitely check it out: http://www.ted.com/talks/eli_pariser_beware_online_filter_bubbles.html http://www.ted.com/talks/eli_pariser_beware_online_filter_bu...
- godkira 15y agoThat's exactly what this article reminded me of. While I would love to only see an internet filled with stimulating intellectual conversations, I don't want an algorithm deciding what I see and don't see. While a personalization approach could work, I believe that a better solution is changing the way the discussion forum works, not hiding and censoring certain content from certain people.