4 ms·
HN has multiple algorithms to prevent sink controversial topics and the like, and the removal of "How", "X ways" etc. could also be seen as editorialization. I
by supriyo-biswas 4y ago
HN has multiple algorithms to prevent sink controversial topics and the like, and the removal of "How", "X ways" etc. could also be seen as editorialization.
I honestly don't see a way to balance the two interests, unless a voluntary opt-out to the algorithm (such as HN's /new) also suffices to comply with the new law.
- BaseballPhysics 4y agoYou missed my point: show me the algorithm. You just described how you think HN works but unless you work there you can't have first hand knowledge. I know I don't. So show me the algorithm. Let's have an open conversation based on facts instead of speculation. As an aside, I also think the lines are easier drawn than you think. For example: is the algorithm based purely on overt signals from the userbase (votes, flags, etc)? Or is it based on an analysis of the content itself, which is then used to fuel a recommendation engine? If the latter, are the recommendations based purely on analyzing past expressed preference? Or is there some other baked in weighting? Algorithms aren't dark mysterious things. They're entirely explainable, and if opened up you could have a real discussion about what is and isn't editorial promotion of content.
- judahmeek 4y agoA lot of content moderation / censorship isn't by algorithm. Recommendations, sure, but not the removal of content.
- BaseballPhysics 4y agoThen it's a good thing I wasn't addressing moderation in general but only algorithmic curation at scale. What about my comments suggested otherwise?