4 ms·
I'm not sure "randomness" is the general property, but rather unexpectedness. The content-provider may well be following a "formula" like with fiction plots, th
by simplestats 5y ago
I'm not sure "randomness" is the general property, but rather unexpectedness. The content-provider may well be following a "formula" like with fiction plots, that give the protagonist setbacks and victories. Facebook uses approaches which try to profit within the constraints of a relatively small group of programmers trying to make money off billions of users. It doesn't mean these approaches are the best overall at serving the most desirable content to any given niche of users. Or even the best at making money qwithin those constraints. If are to believe in "network effects" (the other popular basis for calling for a breakup of Facebook) Facebook is simply succeeding because it is there first. Rather independent of this claim that they are winning by being the most competant.
- guerrilla 5y agoDono what's with your strawmen arguments here or what your point is besides being argumentative, but I didn't say anything about best. I'm gonna just assume they all see some value in it and you don't have any inside knowledge.
- simplestats 5y agoThe point of the thread is that these algorithms are not a special new threat, but it's the availability of content itself, targetted or not. Since we're analyzing each other's psychology now, I do think that insecure and defensive behavior like your post is a real problem with social media. I am not trying to bully or hurt you personally, but simply share some thoughts on a topic.