←back to thread

I ditched the algorithm for RSS

(joeyehand.com)
744 points DearNarwhal | 1 comments | 16 Jan 25 12:18 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
bluGill ◴[16 Jan 25 19:11 UTC] No.42729542[source]▶
A good algorithm is a good thing. However what a good algorithm is for me is often different from what it is for those who maintain them. Outrage gets attention and sometimes it is needed, but there is a level of too much, and also a lot of outrage unfairly represents the issues and so it makes me mad even though if I understood the details I wouldn't be mad just concerned.

I want an algorithm that surfaces things of interest to me, then says "you have seen it all, go outside" (with an option of if I'm confined to a hospital bed to go on). Algorithm maintainers want me to keep scrolling for more ad dollars.

replies(11): >>42729694 #>>42730030 #>>42730343 #>>42731465 #>>42732223 #>>42732697 #>>42733474 #>>42733961 #>>42735114 #>>42764093 #>>42764671 #
1. tolerance ◴[16 Jan 25 19:23 UTC] No.42729694[source]▶
> I want an algorithm that surfaces things of interest to me, then says "you have seen it all, go outside" (with an option of if I'm confined to a hospital bed to go on).

[Acquire, or Employ your] good taste, sensibility & discipline.

Edit: For the record, "Employ your..." assumed that it if "good taste, sensibility & discipline" was not already acquired, it was already possessed and who I was responding to is able to put it to use.

Let those characteristics be your algorithm...or rather, your natural heuristic for living fair.

Has good faith met the end that it's said that chivalry saw?