←back to thread

744 points DearNarwhal | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.206s | source
Show context
bluGill ◴[] 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. WhyNotHugo ◴[] No.42764093[source]
Such an algorithm would require plenty of data to be well trained, and I fear that the same crowd that would value such an algorithm, prioritises privacy too much.

Perhaps malicious algorithms and tracking have driven us too paranoid to even collaborate on an algorithm that actually serves us.