|
|
|
|
|
|
by ocrow
1528 days ago
|
|
|
These recommendation systems take control away from individuals over what content they see and replace that choice with black box algorithms that don't explain why you are seeing the content that you are or what other content was excluded. All of the companies who have deployed these content selection algorithms could have also given you manual choice over the content that you see, but chose instead to let the algorithm solely determine the content of your feed, either removing the manual option entirely or burying it so thoroughly that no one bothers to use it. These algorithms are not benign. They make choices about what information you consume, whose opinions you read, what movies you watch, what products you are exposed to, even which politicians messages you hear. When people complain about the takeover of algorithms, they don't mean databases or web interfaces. They mean this: content selection or preference algorithms. We should be deeply suspicious. We should demand greater accountability. We should require that the algorithms explain themselves and offer alternatives. We should implement better. Give control back to the users in meaningful ways If software engineering is indeed a profession, our professional responsibilities include tempering the damaging effects of content selection algorithms. |
|
|
Do you know how a TV channel decides to schedule stories?
Humans, its all humans. Looking at the metrics, and steering stuff that feeds that metric.
Content filters are dumb and easy to understand. seriously, open up a fresh account at FB, instagram, twitter or tiktok.
First it'll try and get a list of people you already know. Don't give it that.
Then it'll give you a bunch of super popular but click baity influencers to follow. why? because they are the things that drive attention.
if you follow those defaults, you'll get a view of whats shallow and popular: spam, tits, dicks and money.
If you find a subject leader, for example a independent tool maker, cook, pattern maker, builder, then most of your feed will be full of those subjects, save for about 10% random shit thats there to expand your subject range (mostly tits, dicks, spam or money)
What you'll see is stuff related to what you like and stare at.
And thats the problem, they are dumb mirrors. Thats why you don't let kids play with them. Thats why you don't let people with eating disorders go on them, thats why mental health needs to be more accessible, because some times holding up a mirror to your dark desires is corrosive.
Could filter designers do more? fuck yeah, be we also have to be aware that filters are a great whipping boy for other more powerful things.