4 ms·

Because Facebook's algorithms actively amplify negative and provocative information. They could choose not to do this and accept lower profits. If they had a p

Because Facebook's algorithms actively amplify negative and provocative information. They could choose not to do this and accept lower profits. If they had a purely linear chronological feed then a lot of these problems would vastly diminish.

baby 5y ago
By showing you more relevant things? Youtube and tiktok do it too. The alternative is people watching fox news all day long.
- worrycue 5y ago
  There are many things that are “relevant”. If you have an interest in retro Casio watch collecting, showing you review videos for retro Casio watches would be relevant. But … would it get you “engaged” as much as showing you biased political videos with outrage inducing clickbait titles? Facebook’s algorithm is like an orchestra conductor. By its choice of content it chooses to show Facebook users, it guides the actions of its users. It’s main goal is to guide its users into sticking around for as long as possible - which while is somewhat manipulative, most people aren’t too bothered by that. Unfortunately their algorithm’s choice of content has been discovered to have other more unpleasant side effects … and Facebook isn’t willing to sacrifice profit by having its algorithm suggest stuff that’s just as relevant to a user, without the unpleasant side effects, but less “engaging”. In the shorten 60 minutes interview, I believe the whistleblower mentioned that Facebook leading up to the 2020 election actually clamp down on its algorithm fearing things could going south but lifted the measures after the election was over … then we got 6th Jan 2021.
  - baby 5y ago
    That theory is a bit simplistic. How would you design a system that is useful to people? What metrics would you consider when weighting different content to show?
    - worrycue 5y ago
      Maybe they can just … not promote stuff that they have identified as causing these unpleasant side effects - e.g. don’t promote political clickbait. In the worst case only promote things that they know are safe.
      - baby 5y ago
        They actually banned political ads for a while: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/03/technology/facebook-ends-ban-on-political-advertising.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/03/technology/facebook-ends-... but honestly, I think the US government should cap the amount of ads or money a candidate can spend, the ads you're getting on facebook is really the symptom of a much deeper issue.
- ryan_lane 5y ago
  You're giving other examples of sites known to do harm with their recommendation engines. Youtube is just as complicit in QAnon and in redpilling people as Facebook. Removing the recommendation engine from Youtube is something that would be a net positive for the world.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

baby 5y ago

By showing you more relevant things? Youtube and tiktok do it too. The alternative is people watching fox news all day long.

worrycue 5y ago
There are many things that are “relevant”. If you have an interest in retro Casio watch collecting, showing you review videos for retro Casio watches would be relevant. But … would it get you “engaged” as much as showing you biased political videos with outrage inducing clickbait titles? Facebook’s algorithm is like an orchestra conductor. By its choice of content it chooses to show Facebook users, it guides the actions of its users. It’s main goal is to guide its users into sticking around for as long as possible - which while is somewhat manipulative, most people aren’t too bothered by that. Unfortunately their algorithm’s choice of content has been discovered to have other more unpleasant side effects … and Facebook isn’t willing to sacrifice profit by having its algorithm suggest stuff that’s just as relevant to a user, without the unpleasant side effects, but less “engaging”. In the shorten 60 minutes interview, I believe the whistleblower mentioned that Facebook leading up to the 2020 election actually clamp down on its algorithm fearing things could going south but lifted the measures after the election was over … then we got 6th Jan 2021.
- baby 5y ago
  That theory is a bit simplistic. How would you design a system that is useful to people? What metrics would you consider when weighting different content to show?
  - worrycue 5y ago
    Maybe they can just … not promote stuff that they have identified as causing these unpleasant side effects - e.g. don’t promote political clickbait. In the worst case only promote things that they know are safe.
    - baby 5y ago
      They actually banned political ads for a while: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/03/technology/facebook-ends-ban-on-political-advertising.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/03/technology/facebook-ends-... but honestly, I think the US government should cap the amount of ads or money a candidate can spend, the ads you're getting on facebook is really the symptom of a much deeper issue.
ryan_lane 5y ago
You're giving other examples of sites known to do harm with their recommendation engines. Youtube is just as complicit in QAnon and in redpilling people as Facebook. Removing the recommendation engine from Youtube is something that would be a net positive for the world.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]