4 ms·
> Twitter has several Candidate Sources that we use to retrieve recent and relevant Tweets for a user. For each request, we attempt to extract the best 1500 Twe
by danso 4y ago
> Twitter has several Candidate Sources that we use to retrieve recent and relevant Tweets for a user. For each request, we attempt to extract the best 1500 Tweets from a pool of hundreds of millions through these sources. We find candidates from people you follow (In-Network) and from people you don’t follow (Out-of-Network).
> Today, the For You timeline consists of 50% In-Network Tweets and 50% Out-of-Network Tweets on average, though this may vary from user to user.
It would’ve been interesting to see what changes were made since Musk’s takeover. As someone who followed 5,000+ users, I know I never saw a tweet that wasn’t either from nor retweeted by someone I followed — e.g. I never saw those “[user you follow] liked [someone you don’t follow] tweet”
50%/50% in FYP seems to reflect my experience today — which is much worse, to the point that I’ll regularly switch to viewing by List b/c I miss seeing people who I want to read.
I wonder how much testing and analysis went into deciding on the 50/50 ratio — e.g. how does it impact user engagement and behavior. Because it sounds like an easy round value that you’d land on when thinking “users should be pushed out of their bubbles”
- cubefox 4y agoPerhaps if you did follow so many people they got drowned out, but with substantially fewer following, those recommended tweets were a big part of what I saw. Especially in the last year or so before Musk took over: Twitter went a lot more aggressive and didn't just show tweets which people you follow "liked", but also other tweets, which the algorithm somehow determined you might like, which was often wrong, and, moreover, so frequent that it made a big portion of the timeline. The "following" tab fixed this problem.
- danso 4y agoYep, having had created a few throwaway accounts I definitely got a sense of how the algorithm compensated for the majority of users who aren't super active. And it makes sense -- most new users aren't going to want to spend account creation picking 50 accounts to follow. But if someone has hit the follow button 1,000+ times, it's reasonable to have some faith that they've seen a lot of tweets and know what they want. Showing a few out-of-network tweets seems reasonable (I got enough as it is through followings' retweets). But 50% of a feed that already can't fit tweets from thousands of followings just feels like shit. The worst part is that the share of in-network tweets seems to be highly concentrated to the last 10 or so people I most recently interacted with, e.g. seeing the same user over and over just because I liked one of their tweets the other day. Which makes sense to save on computation costs, but it's pushed me into a much tighter bubble than I ever had when the timeline wasn't so out-of-network focused.
- cubefox 4y agoIs the "following" tab an option for you? Or what would you like the "for you" tab to do? Filter out heavy tweeters? Prioritize more popular tweets?
- danso 4y agoThe Following tab limits to my followers, but in reverse chrono order. This is also not desirable b/c it limits to whoever’s posting whenever I’ve happened to check the feed. I’d like to see interesting tweets from a few hours ago, and not just Australian tweets when I’m up late at night.
- coldcode 4y agoA year ago my account with 5700 followers got an average of 3000 impressions per post (art). Today it's only 200-500. It mentions their fanout system was replaced by something new, not sure when or if thats in the drop, but my impression count dropped around April-May last year. Clearly something decided my posts should not shown to my followers very often.
- yeahsure22 4y ago[dead]