A controllable algorithmic feed solves problem 1 (kinda) but not problem 2. The phrase “algorithmic cruelty” is best demonstrated with the most seemingly innoc

A controllable algorithmic feed solves problem 1 (kinda) but not problem 2. The phrase “algorithmic cruelty” is best demonstrated with the most seemingly innocuous efforts. Like reminding you of a special birthday photo with a friend who has died and the computer has no way of knowing that. The paperclip problem never goes away even if you’re in control. It’s like the butterfly effect. At least if everyone has a slightly different algorithm then the overall system wouldn’t align to produce mobs and harassment quite as easilly. Also without centralized control then mitigating those effects becomes much more complicated. Even when it works flawlessly with no “side effects” it can have negative consequences. If it’s too good or you have too much fun with it then maybe you spend less time with real friends or ignoring other things. I use a chronological timeline and it gets boring sometimes. That boredom is a useful signal to me to go do something else. ( chronological is still an algorithm we just tend to not think of it as one) At the end of the day I agree it’s better to have a distributed and Democratic feed then be at the mercy of someone else. That still doesn’t mean ALL of the problems with algorithmic feeds are solved by giving the user more control. It also doesn’t begin to get into the complexity of how a non-programmer would begin to tune such an algorithm without sliders and buttons that go into an algorithm someone else ultimately wrote.