The assumption is that centrally managed social media is bad because their algorithm is bad. But actually, they are bad because they are centrally managed and force one algorithm onto you. I’m not even advocating algorithm-by-choice. Even instance-specific algorithms would already work and would make the whole experience much more enjoyable and less boring. And if an instance’s algorithm(s) is too aggressive, it gets defederated. That would result in a much more exciting experience imo. And by the way: what’s the problem with getting old posts back in the timeline if it makes the overall conversation more interesting?

  • @RobotToasterEnglish
    5•10 months ago

    No idea why you’re getting downvoted when lemmy uses an algorithm by default.

    • @TORFdot0@lemmy.worldEnglish
      13•10 months ago

      Technically sort by top and some by new are algorithms. But that’s not what people talk about when they say algorithm with regards to social media it’s secret sauce engagement based algorithms used to show content.

      The active and rising sort options are fairly simple and open source so we know exactly how it works

      • Kaldo
        0•10 months ago

        Okay, so people would then be fine if we add better trending / popular / related-to-your-interests feed to Mastodon? Because based on comments here they exclusively want the chronological feed, regardless of what your definition of algorithm is.

    • NekuSoulEnglish
      3•10 months ago

      Probably because there exists a bit of a rift in the technical term ‘algorithm’ and how it’s commonly used in discourse. Technically it describes both:

      1. An open-source algorithm that assigns a simple score based on votes, score and age, where two users subscribing to the same communities will always have the same result.
      2. A hidden algorithm that’s based on an unknown amount of invisible variables, many of which are based on user-tracking, and tries to maximize time-spent at all costs.

      While OP (hopefully) intended the former, most people immediately think of the latter when the term is used. Personally I’d like to see an implementation of the former as well, as a simple way to get up speed on the most important things that happened over night for example, before switching back to chronological timeline.

      • @KelsonV@lemmy.worldEnglish
        4•10 months ago

        Also:

        1. A open, customizable algorithm that lets the user set their own priorities, and if it does any “learning” based on user actions, it’s geared toward the user’s priorities and easy for the user to see and correct what it’s learned.

        Again, key factors being: open, customizable, correctable, and serving the user, not serving the platform.

        • @KelsonV@lemmy.worldEnglish
          2•10 months ago

          Examples of this might include prioritizing mutual followers on Mastodon, or prioritizing low-traffic subscribed communities on Lemmy so that they don’t get lost in the 50 posts from the busier communities.

      • @RobotToasterEnglish
        1•10 months ago

        I guess I can understand how some may be concerned about the latter happening, but given mastodon is open source a hidden algorithm isn’t really possible (barring some esoteric technique like code obfuscation)

    • IzzyEnglish
      1•10 months ago

      Lemmy uses simple filters. It has no memory of what you have looked at and takes nothing into consideration other than the chosen filter at the moment. You can even link directly to the filter because it is part of the url.

      https://lemmy.world/?dataType=Post&listingType=All&page=1&sort=Hot

      This is searching for the entire federated space of lemmy.world and sorting by hot. You might argue that “hot” is an algorithm, but it is also only determined by things such as creation date, upvotes and comments. Everyone gets exactly the same view so it isn’t specially curated.