6 ms·
Yeah its funny, because they used to have the most reliable system for finding new good content. Back when you could just sort by the number of stars as rated
by Enginerrrd 5y ago
Yeah its funny, because they used to have the most reliable system for finding new good content. Back when you could just sort by the number of stars as rated by other users and before they started manipulating that, it actually worked really well. If something was 4.5 stars, it was almost universally good. They innovated their way into their recommendation system being completely useless and unused by me. Now I just wait to get recommendations from other people I trust to act as a filter for me. I used to occasionally peruse the netflix original content because it was relatively good compared to average in the industry and often worth investigating, but I don't even do that now.
- ChicagoBoy11 5y agoI wonder how much of this is due to the fact that initially the system really is mostly trained by your preference, but over time, it then becomes trained on your preference mediated by the algorithm, and then slowly you see a divergence of your actual preferences and what it suggests to you/you end up clicking on. Peter Norvig had a great lecture about this in the context of language translation, and how despite so much info being out there on the web, known "good" corpuses of data that were 100% human-made and guaranteed to not being the product of an algortihm (like official translations of UN documents) were still super useful.