4 ms·
> so that we can override their curiosity and say "OK, learn something else today." I'm not sure you even noticed the question you just presented: "what someth
by thomastjeffery 3y ago
> so that we can override their curiosity and say "OK, learn something else today."
I'm not sure you even noticed the question you just presented: "what something?"
If you can find a meaningful answer to that question, I suspect it will resolve your problem without help.
As a rule of thumb, any solution that boils down to "stop" will be practically impossible to implement. A more tractable solution is usually along the lines of "do this instead".
Something that could be really valuable here is a competitor to YouTube's algorithm. Copyright makes that difficult, because YouTube is in a legally enforced position to monopolize their library/metadata.
- aantix 3y agoI'd be more than willing to curate on behalf of my children. Or delegate their recommendations to only a select series of educational YouTube channels.
- BlueTemplar 3y agoAnother competitor to YouTube with its own editorializing is missing the point. Especially if the only competition is around the feed. (Same as when some reader here was missing the point when asking for an editorialized feed for PeerTube videos.) Focus should rather be on banning platforms. (They are digging their own graves with that editorializing anyway, since once they do that they become legally responsible for publishing what their users upload.) Only then you can start talking about only allowing open algorithms (so, no neural networks) on generalist search engines.