I'm going viral with assholes
Added 2025-03-07 16:54:03 +0000 UTCComments
Yeah, most company's recommendation systems are a black box of a collection of huge models at this point. If the models are just rewarded for increasing engagement or ad dollars, it doesn't matter why people are engaging, just that they are. No one really knows why they recommend what they do, and companies don't care
Hendry
2025-03-09 18:57:04 +0000 UTCCongrats!?..?
kaldo
2025-03-09 06:40:18 +0000 UTCOk like this is a goof, but I do actually like the underlying concept. It made me think of how your latest video specifically relating to algorithms also got some traffic from being linked in the most recent video on the Technology Connections channel. So I watched the TC vid too, and it mentioned (among many other things) how the adoption of automatically curated “for you” style feeds would incite this exact sort of confusion-based engagement by directing people toward more insular conversations for which they might lack context, or more niche topics they may not understand. I remember this being particularly incendiary in Reddit subreddits. Scenario: we’d be having fun exchanging the contents of our memetic repositories of Sam Raimi Spider-Man film dialogue, but just one bigger-than-normal post could spawn a whole thread and consequent vengeful post-storm all stemming from one incurious user who “just saw this on /r/popular and didn’t get it.” Here, the confusion was understandable, but it also inexplicably felt like an instance of someone straight up using the platform incorrectly. Which again relates back to the aforementioned HG video and my own inference that Reddit and its subreddits run slightly opposed to the “for you” model. Other things like Twitter’s Spaces and YouTube trying to incorporate Community posts feel like the same issue being approached from the opposite direction, so I wonder if there’s a kind of information dichotomy to be drawn there. But like, for all we know, that last commenter really does have years worth of usage data enabling the platform to just keep serving them content they’re unlikely to understand, and their entertainment is deemed secondary to any resultant semi-witting engagement they might be more inclined to produce. I guess that’s probably the case for all users to an extent, but maybe for some more than others? Meh. A duplicitous god, indeed..
Josh Brooks
2025-03-08 06:55:26 +0000 UTCYeah, to be fair, this post is really an algorithm joke, but I also deleted a lot of comments too inappropriate to be funny
Hendry
2025-03-07 22:24:20 +0000 UTCThere only appear to be about 4 toxic comments like that and all within a few hours of each other. What I find ironic is there still appears to be bots trying to reverse engineer your blocklist, or are they just trolls?
Eric Frank
2025-03-07 21:21:48 +0000 UTCit's always easier said than done but try not to give it too much of your headspace and time. have a nice day
bxtcher
2025-03-07 18:07:03 +0000 UTCOk, to be fair, I think that person just wanted to know if I was blocking the name of the illustrious president. He at least actually got the point of the video, so who can fault him for validating his freedom of speech? haha
Hendry
2025-03-07 17:25:44 +0000 UTCEh, these kinds of comments usually make up a smaller percentage of my regular ones so I'm used to them haha
Hendry
2025-03-07 17:23:32 +0000 UTCBernie Sanders (now it's a pincer attack)
WellenInspektor
2025-03-07 17:13:01 +0000 UTCIt's always the ones that feel entitled to be heard that also throw around insults and slurs
Lars Constantin
2025-03-07 17:06:48 +0000 UTCI love that A) that dude commented twice, B) they don't know what the first amendment is
Doggfite
2025-03-07 17:02:29 +0000 UTCAlmighty engagement. But... yikes. Hope they cool it, that's stressful.
Matt Leffler
2025-03-07 17:01:38 +0000 UTC
