4 ms·

"Facebook has created a system of incentives that are inexorably leading to harmful outcomes" Exactly right. The solution baffles me. "Force Facebook to reveal

"Facebook has created a system of incentives that are inexorably leading to harmful outcomes" Exactly right. The solution baffles me. "Force Facebook to reveal and permit research so we understand the system and fix it" Basically keep the harmful system in place, but pass the reins to an unspecified cabal hiding under the innocuous word "we". Hard pass.

astronautjones 5y ago
end algorithmic recommendations
- SamBam 5y ago
  Ah yes. Get rid of Pandora and GoodReads because what they're doing has basically the outcome.
  - tehjoker 5y ago
    Maybe subject algorithmic feeds to public oversight.
    - fallingknife 5y ago
      It is subject to public oversight. It's designed to give the public exactly what they want.
      - tehjoker 5y ago
        That's like saying a slot machine is regulated by the gambling addict.
  - angelzen 5y ago
    Granularity matters. Social feed granularity is small enough that an algorithm, even primitive, can sketch an arbitrary narrative on the spot by juxtaposing unrelated items, akin to a ransom note built from letters cut off from different publications. Pandora and especially GoodReads have large granularity, making it difficult to employ in the same manner.
  - sixstringtheory 5y ago
    Very different outcomes I'd say. Are friends and family getting torn apart on those platforms? Do they need armies of moderators to remove abuse material or fact-check posts? (I'm sure there's some, but not on the same scale as Facebook.) This is the first I've ever heard such a thing suggested, and certainly haven't observed it personally.
    - SamBam 5y ago
      I was being facetious. GP advocating banning all recommendation engines.
- jensensbutton 5y ago
  TikTok wouldn't be allowed to exist.
djabatt 5y ago
The "lean in" people and incentives have made society suffer for profit. Perhaps we can define a better set of incentives that reward companies of people building products.
- imgabe 5y ago
  We can. It's called pay directly for the services you use. It is a time-honored system where you give providers money in exchange for goods and services. In response, their incentive is to keep you happy and healthy and prosperous so you can continue to give them money.
  - ehnto 5y ago
    Which will never happen. That takes customer impetus, it's not there. People don't understand the cost of the free products they use, they are unlikely to switch. So what ways would influence your outcome to actually happen? Because I think it would be the right way to run software platforms as well, I just don't see a pathway there that isn't heavy handed. I would be for regulating the advertising industry, since I feel it is the root of all this. None of the unethical software magnates would exist if not for the advertising dollars pouring through the door thanks to the ad-tech apparatuses they have built, and the poor incentives that creates. But that regulation is challenging and unlikely too.
    - imgabe 5y ago
      I think a freemium model would be better. You should have to pay for having a large number of followers/friends past a certain point. For example, maybe an account with 1,000 friends is free. Up to 10,000: $5 / month, up to 100,000 $50/month, and so on. If you're Kim Kardashian with 250 million followers and you're making millions of dollars hawking skin cream or whatever, you can afford to pay a few thousand dollars a month to reach your large, valuable audience. This way, the content creators can sell ads if they want. The platform doesn't sell ads. Users only see ads if they follow a creator who has sponsors. It's up to that creator to make their content worthwhile enough for people to choose to follow them in spite of the ads. A platform should be like a company that sells TV broadcast towers. They give people a way to reach an audience. What that content creator does with their audience is up to them. Maybe they could charge a subscription. Maybe they get sponsors. If it's a large non-profit or government organization, maybe they pay at a lower rate or get to use it for free.
alecthomas 5y ago
It's more nuanced than this. You can watch her full testimony here if you're actually interested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOnpVQnv5Cw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOnpVQnv5Cw

astronautjones 5y ago

end algorithmic recommendations

SamBam 5y ago
Ah yes. Get rid of Pandora and GoodReads because what they're doing has basically the outcome.
- tehjoker 5y ago
  Maybe subject algorithmic feeds to public oversight.
  - fallingknife 5y ago
    It is subject to public oversight. It's designed to give the public exactly what they want.
    - tehjoker 5y ago
      That's like saying a slot machine is regulated by the gambling addict.
- angelzen 5y ago
  Granularity matters. Social feed granularity is small enough that an algorithm, even primitive, can sketch an arbitrary narrative on the spot by juxtaposing unrelated items, akin to a ransom note built from letters cut off from different publications. Pandora and especially GoodReads have large granularity, making it difficult to employ in the same manner.
- sixstringtheory 5y ago
  Very different outcomes I'd say. Are friends and family getting torn apart on those platforms? Do they need armies of moderators to remove abuse material or fact-check posts? (I'm sure there's some, but not on the same scale as Facebook.) This is the first I've ever heard such a thing suggested, and certainly haven't observed it personally.
  - SamBam 5y ago
    I was being facetious. GP advocating banning all recommendation engines.
jensensbutton 5y ago
TikTok wouldn't be allowed to exist.

djabatt 5y ago

The "lean in" people and incentives have made society suffer for profit. Perhaps we can define a better set of incentives that reward companies of people building products.

imgabe 5y ago
We can. It's called pay directly for the services you use. It is a time-honored system where you give providers money in exchange for goods and services. In response, their incentive is to keep you happy and healthy and prosperous so you can continue to give them money.
- ehnto 5y ago
  Which will never happen. That takes customer impetus, it's not there. People don't understand the cost of the free products they use, they are unlikely to switch. So what ways would influence your outcome to actually happen? Because I think it would be the right way to run software platforms as well, I just don't see a pathway there that isn't heavy handed. I would be for regulating the advertising industry, since I feel it is the root of all this. None of the unethical software magnates would exist if not for the advertising dollars pouring through the door thanks to the ad-tech apparatuses they have built, and the poor incentives that creates. But that regulation is challenging and unlikely too.
  - imgabe 5y ago
    I think a freemium model would be better. You should have to pay for having a large number of followers/friends past a certain point. For example, maybe an account with 1,000 friends is free. Up to 10,000: $5 / month, up to 100,000 $50/month, and so on. If you're Kim Kardashian with 250 million followers and you're making millions of dollars hawking skin cream or whatever, you can afford to pay a few thousand dollars a month to reach your large, valuable audience. This way, the content creators can sell ads if they want. The platform doesn't sell ads. Users only see ads if they follow a creator who has sponsors. It's up to that creator to make their content worthwhile enough for people to choose to follow them in spite of the ads. A platform should be like a company that sells TV broadcast towers. They give people a way to reach an audience. What that content creator does with their audience is up to them. Maybe they could charge a subscription. Maybe they get sponsors. If it's a large non-profit or government organization, maybe they pay at a lower rate or get to use it for free.

alecthomas 5y ago

It's more nuanced than this. You can watch her full testimony here if you're actually interested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOnpVQnv5Cw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOnpVQnv5Cw