This is the equivalent of those people that turn up in threads discussing generative artificial intelligence and try to correct everyone’s use of “AI” as shorthand for that specific technology. It’s pedantic grandstanding with no real purpose - everyone actually involved in the discussion understands what they’re talking about.
Comment on Labor plans crackdown on social media algorithms as Taylor says he’s ‘deeply sceptical’
Eq0@literature.cafe 3 days ago
People really don’t understand what ‘algorithm’ means. You can’t turn off all algorithms to determine what appears in your feed. If you do that, you would get nothing in your feed at all. But, there are many different algorithms and you can give power to the user in choosing which one(s) to use. Only content from your contacts? New first? Highest upvotes first? A mix? Payed content how and where? And so on.
Small pet peeve of mine…
Ilandar@lemmy.today 3 days ago
scops@reddthat.com 3 days ago
I disagree. Legislation is the scenario where specific language is most important. If social media platforms can prove that the law is impossible to follow as written, they are much more likely to nullify any benefit it might have intended.
Also, I think you overestimate the average person’s understanding of what an algorithm is.
DrunkenDuckling@lemmus.org 2 days ago
When drafting legislation you’re right, but she is not actively drafting legislation, she is proposing an idea to the public.
Good communication means tailoring your language to your audience.
Taleya@aussie.zone 2 days ago
Give me a chronological timeline of posts by people I chose to follow and fuck off.
Tumblr does it without issue
Nath@aussie.zone 2 days ago
This was your original Facebook feed. Chronological updates from your friends. Like a stream of shower thoughts, kid updates, silly shit someone’s family member said etc. I deleted Facebook when it was still like this, so it’s kept that vibe in my mind.
Taleya@aussie.zone 2 days ago
Yeah it hasnt been like that for over a decade or so
DrunkenDuckling@lemmus.org 2 days ago
Original Instagram too. I never went back after they changed it like a decade ago.
chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 days ago
There is more information in the article about which algorithms it does not consider to be algorithms:
Opt-out options for algorithms would give users the choice to make their social media feeds only feature content from friends and groups they choose to follow.
LastYearsIrritant@sopuli.xyz 3 days ago
Dunno, I guess - new first, only your contacts - is KIND of an algorithm, but I don’t know that anyone would call that an algorithm.
Eq0@literature.cafe 3 days ago
Any systematic method of decision is an algorithm, so it is an algorithm.
Usually you also want to add contacts-of-contacts posts if they are relevant “enough”, so you need to define what that means. New first often gives you a lot of crap and hides more interesting content (have you tried it on Reddit?), so that’s not the preferred algorithm even in the best case scenario.
And here we are, deep in algorithm making.
drosophila@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 days ago
Usually you also want to add contacts-of-contacts posts if they are relevant “enough”, so you need to define what that means […]
lol no
This is like talking to an addict.
LastYearsIrritant@sopuli.xyz 3 days ago
I can decide who I want to follow. I hate it when the “algorithm” decides when something wouldn’t be interesting and hides it from me when I specifically followed someone.
Also, contacts of contacts can be reshared by my contacts if it would be interesting, so I don’t want an algorithm deciding that I need to see it.
Basically, show me a timeline of my followed contacts sorted by new and stop trying to decide what I should see for me.
DrunkenDuckling@lemmus.org 2 days ago
…You should make sure you know the actual technical definition of an algorithm if you’re gonna be semantically pedantic.
lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world 3 days ago
Social media began as “timeline” - in fact on most services like facebook it was called TIMELINE because it showed - you guessed it - posts, that happened, in order. And guess what happened if you ran out? You started to see the same stuff as yesterday, got bored, and logged off.
There’s no need for gatekeeping here, and yes every single company could make this change if they so desired.
Gatekeeping technology is a gigantic pet peeve of most people’s
Tenderizer@aussie.zone 3 days ago
People might not know what “algorithm” means, but they do know what “the algorithm” means.
The algorithm: Personalized recommendations over which you have opaque control.
Eq0@literature.cafe 3 days ago
When tracking about legislation, being outside is importante. Because as present the law is both useless and unenforceable, on top of being demagogic
Tenderizer@aussie.zone 3 days ago
The news headline is not the text of the legislation. What people understand and what’s appropriate to put into legislation are two different things.
Eq0@literature.cafe 3 days ago
But the article doesn’t give any additional info and it’s therefore only there to rile up people against “the spooky algos”