If the users chooses what they are shown and the order they are shown in, then it's fine. If the platform chooses, then it's not, because they will always choose what creates the most engagement.
replySo HN should be banned
replyNot necessarily. Just fix the algorithm. Showing all submissions by time should be ok, showing all submissions by number of upvotes should be ok if the user chooses that.
replydeleted
replyThe platform can also add ghost upvotes and downvotes and censor upvotes and downvotes.
replyIs heroin the same as beer? Who even knows.
replyThat's the problem, recommendation algorithms on networks beyond a certain scale should be publicly auditable.
replyIf they're not, I should be able to opt-out of them.
I think I would be fine with a positive enumeration. Some ideas for serving content:
reply - purely random
- sponsored but without user tracking (like old school TV ads)
- sponsored for user selected geographical area feed
- sponsored for user current location geographical area feed
- follow "friends" or influencers
- purely timeline
- discussion boards
- timeline (IRC like)
- threaded
- user votes (not magic platform votes)
- follow keywordsSo Hacker News wouldn't be allowed?
replyI think it should be, maybe I'm missing some aspect, I just cooked up a simple list of rules on the spot, sheesh :-D
replyEdit: huh, I'm probably stupid, but can you explain more?
HN uses magical platform votes.
replyAnd it should be transparent about it. When Dan uses a magic lever, it should be visible.
replyWould Facebook be okay if all the Nazi propaganda posts were tagged "Facebook boosted this post"?
reply