Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Angle (angle@anticapitalist.party)'s status on Monday, 21-Nov-2022 07:24:22 JST Angle

   So, on the topic of 'reverse-chron' VS 'fancy-algorithm', this is one of the places we can pretty easily have it both ways, isn't it? Just let people choose their algorithm off of a list somewhere. At worst, maybe it takes a day for the server to swap your feed over. That's annoying, certainly, but hardly a deal breaker. Your thoughts? :/

   • Embed this notice
     witchlectical runeterialist (anna@witches.live)'s status on Monday, 21-Nov-2022 07:24:20 JST witchlectical runeterialist

     in reply to

     @Angle yeah but what algorithms? the problem with social media feeds is that they have algorithms meant to be addicting and increase engagement usually by boosting ragebait and things that are popular, and filtering out things from smaller accounts so they get no reach

     so like, what would the point be? whose interests would it serve? if someone came up with a cool algorithm that found interesting stuff to you, sure, but algorithmic feeds exist damn near entirely in the interests of capitalists and investors that own the platform they're used on

     hypolite likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     Angle (angle@anticapitalist.party)'s status on Monday, 21-Nov-2022 07:24:21 JST Angle

     in reply to

     Actually, while I'm at it - can we just get the option to have those as multiple lists, plus an easy way to minimize/maximise lists? Right now I only really use one list, because that's all that easily fits on my display if I also want Home, Notifications, and Whatever Is Selected. I'd love to be able to use more lists, more easily. :/

   • Embed this notice
     hypolite (hypolite@friendica.mrpetovan.com)'s status on Monday, 21-Nov-2022 07:52:06 JST hypolite

     in reply to
     @Angle The mere mention of "reverse-chron" informs me on where this thought came from, and unfortunately it isn't a good place. Feed algorithms were built for one and one goal only, to maximize engagement and make numbers go up. That's it.
     
     And in this regard they've been wildly successful. Social media network designers saw the numbers go up, deduced that was what users wanted even though it also magically aligned with their business model, and doubled down.
     
     Unfortunately you can't measure community, you can't measure interpersonal bond, you can't measure culture. As the engagement numbers went up, it also shaped how the people interacted with the platforms. Talking about yourself didn't get much engagement and so wasn't shown to many of your followers, but any witty sarcasm would do numbers. This favored celebrities, ideological provocateurs (mostly right-wing) and quirky jokesters (mostly left-wing).
     
     As soon as people learn that some of their content may not be shown to their followers because of any algorithm, no matter how transparent it is for the users that can choose them, they will change the way they write from what felt natural to them. They will adapt to the platform like they've done for commercial platforms before.
     
     Keeping a strict "reverse-chron" timeline order isn't about what's feasible, it's about what kind of community and culture you want on the #Fediverse, and that's why I'm fiercely defending it.
   • Embed this notice
     hypolite (hypolite@friendica.mrpetovan.com)'s status on Monday, 21-Nov-2022 08:08:56 JST hypolite

     in reply to
     @Angle No, you don't understand, there's no good or bad algorithm. As soon as you deviate from "reverse-chron", you'll have a change of culture because there will be something to optimize against.
     
     On the other hand, you can't optimize for "reverse-chron", except posting at the time you expect your audience to be awake, but that's about it. No content change will affect whether your post will make it to your followers' timeline. And that's a good thing.
   • Embed this notice
     Angle (angle@anticapitalist.party)'s status on Monday, 21-Nov-2022 08:08:57 JST Angle

     in reply to

     • hypolite

     @hypolite I mean, the algorithm doesn't *have* to be that way though. You can write your algorithm any way you want. We could have nice algorithms, if we wanted them. I also think it's inevitable that people start experimenting with algorithms on the instances. So, we might as well make sure they're good algorithms. :/

   • Embed this notice
     hypolite (hypolite@friendica.mrpetovan.com)'s status on Monday, 21-Nov-2022 08:51:39 JST hypolite

     in reply to

     • musenhain
     @musenhain I hear what you say, but any change in that regard will be done at a platform level. If Mastodon announces they offer alternative timeline sorting, that makes it a Fediverse-wide event. And even if only one Mastodon user ever uses the feature, I believe it would change the culture.
   • Embed this notice
     musenhain (musenhain@friendica.andreaskilgus.de)'s status on Monday, 21-Nov-2022 08:51:40 JST musenhain

     in reply to

     • hypolite
     @hypolite
     Your arguments fit a fediverse- or instance-wide algorithm. That sort of general timeline control I wouldn't want, too, partly because of the implications on the content creators' side you mentioned.
     But what about an individually customizable ranking for postings that every user may prioritize differently for the personal timeline? Some will use it, others won't, some will just prioritize keywords, others may combine group membership with keywords, prefer original postings over shared, whatever comes to mind and suits one's needs … If every user chooses its own combination of parameters, there's nothing to intentionally optimize for on the writer's side.
   • Embed this notice
     hypolite (hypolite@friendica.mrpetovan.com)'s status on Monday, 21-Nov-2022 08:55:30 JST hypolite

     in reply to
     @Angle It's true, but having a flexible enough system to allow for multiple customizable algorithms is a much harder ask than having just one alternative to the "reverse-chron" order.
     
     Friendica currently has 3 sort options, which is 2 more than it really needs:

     • A sort by post date, which buries boosts down your timeline ❌
     • A sort by activity, where likes and comments bring full conversations back to the top of your timeline. There's no way of knowing exactly what made the conversation pop back. ❌
     • A sort by reception date, which is always consistent no matter the activity or the boosts. ✔

     I'm way more in favor of lists to group a large number of follows by theme than an algorithm which, if it isn't a simple sort order, will drop posts from your follows. And this is a big no-no for me. If I miss a post from someone I follow, I want it to be because of me, not because of the software I use.
   • Embed this notice
     Angle (angle@anticapitalist.party)'s status on Monday, 21-Nov-2022 08:55:31 JST Angle

     in reply to

     • hypolite

     @hypolite Eh, if there's a single broadly adopted algorithm without any user control, this could be an issue. But lots of different algorithms, changing all the time, with users reworking them as they see fit? That's much harder to optimize for, beyond 'write good posts'.

   • Embed this notice
     hypolite (hypolite@friendica.mrpetovan.com)'s status on Monday, 21-Nov-2022 09:04:16 JST hypolite

     in reply to
     @Angle An explanation for why a post is present is easy, we do it in Friendica, but why a post is missing? Much harder to do. Twitter has been successfully using placeholder, but that was only for blocks and mutes, not for algorithm decisions.
   • Embed this notice
     Angle (angle@anticapitalist.party)'s status on Monday, 21-Nov-2022 09:04:17 JST Angle

     in reply to

     • hypolite

     @hypolite Should have some kind of an explanation for why a post is present, the same way Masto has for boosted posts, I think. And yeah, asking for lots of options and control over the algorithm is a larger ask than just an algorithm - but I think it follows naturally for Fedi, and people will keep pushing till they get it, or just fork and add it themselves eventually.