4 ms·

You inner Libertarian has the same problem as every other person with that ideology - you are vastly overestimating the knowledge and capabilities of the averag

You inner Libertarian has the same problem as every other person with that ideology - you are vastly overestimating the knowledge and capabilities of the average user, and the ideas that result will fail in practice. Algorithmic content is a market failure being subsidized by the fact that it helps sell ads. The capitalist greedy function means they're going to keep pushing algo content, because it's the money making engine. If you ban the combination of algorithmic content and targeted advertising, the damage would be vastly reduced (also Meta would implode, because their business is a market failure that only exists because regulators are not enforcing competition laws that prevent the use of free services subsided by ads and other antitrust laws).

BitwiseFool 4y ago
To be clear I wasn't proposing a ban, but the requirement to provide non algorithmic alternatives for content feeds.
- arrosenberg 4y ago
  Yeah, I understood what you said, I just would be against it in general unless advertising is strictly decoupled from it. Even then, I'm not sure there is a huge benefit to it. There used to be a news app called Pulse that LinkedIn bought and killed. To me, that was the best possible execution of the feed concept. It was essentially RSS with a scrollable feed component. You could browse feeds by category, but it wasn't recommending things based on current interests. If you wanted to go down a right/left wing newshole it was possible, but you had to consciously seek it out and go down it. The app wasn't breadcrumbing you.
- q-big 4y ago
  > but the requirement to provide non algorithmic alternatives for content feeds. "Non algorithmic" means "some human creates the content feed by hand". This is also not free of lots of biases and what news portals in the web did in the past.
  - dalmo3 4y ago
    I think "sort by recent" or filtering are considered "non-algorithmic" in this space.

BitwiseFool 4y ago

To be clear I wasn't proposing a ban, but the requirement to provide non algorithmic alternatives for content feeds.

arrosenberg 4y ago
Yeah, I understood what you said, I just would be against it in general unless advertising is strictly decoupled from it. Even then, I'm not sure there is a huge benefit to it. There used to be a news app called Pulse that LinkedIn bought and killed. To me, that was the best possible execution of the feed concept. It was essentially RSS with a scrollable feed component. You could browse feeds by category, but it wasn't recommending things based on current interests. If you wanted to go down a right/left wing newshole it was possible, but you had to consciously seek it out and go down it. The app wasn't breadcrumbing you.
q-big 4y ago
> but the requirement to provide non algorithmic alternatives for content feeds. "Non algorithmic" means "some human creates the content feed by hand". This is also not free of lots of biases and what news portals in the web did in the past.
- dalmo3 4y ago
  I think "sort by recent" or filtering are considered "non-algorithmic" in this space.