Re:Teens who refuse to use social media
by beaconstudios on Wednesday August 29, 2018 @05:29AM
(#17866923)
The user is always free to ignore bad info. It's a serious problem when the platform steps in to do the disregarding for you. That is a form of censorship.
Re:Teens who refuse to use social media
by chrisseaton on Wednesday August 29, 2018 @01:11PM
(#17869905)
> a ranking algorithm could be deployed to undervalue posts which lack credibility
I don't know how you can spin undervaluing something automatically in an algorithm as anything but suppressing it. And it's not 'ignoring' if the person never seem them in the first place because they've been 'undervalued' in the ranking.
That's because your interpretation of the idea is wrong. The algorithm will be only taking social graph into account.. while you (end user) will have full control on how. It's not much different from undervaluing a comment on HN.
Re:Teens who refuse to use social media
by antidesitter on Wednesday August 29, 2018 @07:00PM
(#17872835)
It sounds like you’re looking for a web-of-trust. Here’s an example with trust propagation: https://gist.github.com/dionyziz/e3b296861175e0ebea4b.
Not necessarily. There is no reason why this calculation on the social graph cannot be done by a central entity on your behalf. As long as the results of the calculation are transparent, I see no problem with it.
The big problem is that organizations like FB or Google want to "own" the social graph. They won't let you (except in special cases) to play with it.
As I read it, PP advocates for ignoring those people not suppressing them. Ignoring somebody and punishing them for what they publish is not the same.
Or perhaps more importantly, the question is who does the ignoring? The user or the platform?
Personally, I think users (and not platforms) need better to tools to selectively ignore. For example, it would be great if I could mark somebody on the social network as "unreliable source" and then all people parroting or use that source (transitively through the social graph) would be (proportionally) marked unreliable as well. And vice versa, why cannot I mark things that come from people I know personally as more reliable than things that come from some Russian troll farm (or - for the balance - American astroturfing startup)?