Comment by raincole
2 months ago
It is funny that people on Hackernews are (acting as if they were) against algorithmic feeds. This very site is one of the trailblazers that found out how much people prefer algorithmic feeds to chronological ones.
2 months ago
It is funny that people on Hackernews are (acting as if they were) against algorithmic feeds. This very site is one of the trailblazers that found out how much people prefer algorithmic feeds to chronological ones.
I think you'll find that people who are against algo-feeds are against that being the only choice.
Personally speaking I think the issue is personalized algorithmic feeds.
I want the algorithm to analyze spammers' behavior and filter them out for everyone. Not analyzing my behaviors to filter content for me.
Yes! exactly
[dead]
In what sense is HN an algorithmic feed? It is neither personalised nor does it have a significant discretionary boost beyond "age" and "upvotes". It's qualitatively a different thing.
Sort by weighted upvotes vs time decay is an algorithm. You can review the psedocode here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1781013
Note that there is also "censorship" (!) - `gag_factor` - even in this free thought paradise. The lesson is that no matter your scale, suppressing certain content is necessary to prevent low quality posts and spam from turning your site into a swamp.
Correct, it is not personalized. So we need a different word than 'algorithmic'. People keep saying that word when they want to "ban" a certain kind of math. But they should at least be particular about what they don't like (sort your friends' posts chronologically is also a personalized algorithm, after all..)
The comments in that link claimed that gag = joke, not gag as in gag order :p
On its own an algorithmic feed is fine. Automatically give people what they want to see. Like TV without flipping channels.
It just turned into something out of control with unintended side effects and immoral goals.