4 ms·

> You want your unpopular ideas to be promoted She didn't say "unpopular". She said those that go against the official narrative, regardless of popularity. >

> You want your unpopular ideas to be promoted She didn't say "unpopular". She said those that go against the official narrative, regardless of popularity. > and you think that it's your right. She didn't say that either. She's merely drawing attention to how social media secretly manipulates what is allowed to become or remain popular. > In the author's opinion. We should also remove HN voting system I don't think she said anything of the sort? Her article is very short on solutions. But we should be able to admit a problem exists and discuss it even if we don't yet have a solution.

qayxc 5y ago
> But we should be able to admit a problem exists and discuss it even if we don't yet have a solution. I doubt there even is a solution. At no point in human history have things ever been different to the current situation - and for good reason. Today it's SV tech bros, in the past it was priests, kings, bible translators, newspaper publishers, radio- and TV stations. This is nothing new and complaining about it is like complaining about the desert being dry. It's especially amusing coming from a country were puritanical views are codified in media regulations such that nakedness and profanity is still taboo, whereas hate mongering, spreading misinformation and outright defamation and lies are promoted under the banner of "free speech". A tad hypocritical, but maybe that's just me.
- mantas 5y ago
  Complaining is fine. No change ever started without complaining beforehand. If nobody complains, lots of people won't even notice the issue. Wonder what will be next overlord though.
zozbot234 5y ago
> She didn't say "unpopular". She said those that go against the official narrative, regardless of popularity. That's always been a thing, though. The incentive for big platforms has never been to promote the most popular ideas, much less the most correct ones. It's to promote "engagement" to the greatest possible extent, while ensuring that they're showing advertiser-friendly content at least most of the tme. And big advertisers are easily swayed towards not letting their ads appear beside "misinformation" that contradicts official and quasi-official narratives. You can't get rid of this dynamic except by re-decentralizing search and curation of content.
acdha 5y ago
> She didn't say "unpopular". She said those that go against the official narrative, regardless of popularity. Yes, she said that because it sounds more sympathetic than “I am owed an audience” or admitting that many of the people who saw their reach reduced were in fact trafficking in mistruths. The message that this is the “establishment” suppressing the truth is a very powerful one which inspires a strong emotional reaction from many of us, but it's also far too simplistic — for example, she scare-quotes “fake news” to dismiss it without acknowledging that there was in fact a ton of provably untrue material heavily promoted by the major social networks during the 2016 election cycle to the point where many poll respondents would express belief in falsehoods. Valuing free speech doesn't mean we should pretend that there aren't problems with real impacts.

qayxc 5y ago

> But we should be able to admit a problem exists and discuss it even if we don't yet have a solution. I doubt there even is a solution. At no point in human history have things ever been different to the current situation - and for good reason. Today it's SV tech bros, in the past it was priests, kings, bible translators, newspaper publishers, radio- and TV stations. This is nothing new and complaining about it is like complaining about the desert being dry. It's especially amusing coming from a country were puritanical views are codified in media regulations such that nakedness and profanity is still taboo, whereas hate mongering, spreading misinformation and outright defamation and lies are promoted under the banner of "free speech". A tad hypocritical, but maybe that's just me.

mantas 5y ago
Complaining is fine. No change ever started without complaining beforehand. If nobody complains, lots of people won't even notice the issue. Wonder what will be next overlord though.

zozbot234 5y ago

> She didn't say "unpopular". She said those that go against the official narrative, regardless of popularity. That's always been a thing, though. The incentive for big platforms has never been to promote the most popular ideas, much less the most correct ones. It's to promote "engagement" to the greatest possible extent, while ensuring that they're showing advertiser-friendly content at least most of the tme. And big advertisers are easily swayed towards not letting their ads appear beside "misinformation" that contradicts official and quasi-official narratives. You can't get rid of this dynamic except by re-decentralizing search and curation of content.

acdha 5y ago

> She didn't say "unpopular". She said those that go against the official narrative, regardless of popularity. Yes, she said that because it sounds more sympathetic than “I am owed an audience” or admitting that many of the people who saw their reach reduced were in fact trafficking in mistruths. The message that this is the “establishment” suppressing the truth is a very powerful one which inspires a strong emotional reaction from many of us, but it's also far too simplistic — for example, she scare-quotes “fake news” to dismiss it without acknowledging that there was in fact a ton of provably untrue material heavily promoted by the major social networks during the 2016 election cycle to the point where many poll respondents would express belief in falsehoods. Valuing free speech doesn't mean we should pretend that there aren't problems with real impacts.