search for any tag that has mainly people like beach or hiking, all accounts are from very beautiful people with lots of followers.
your algorithm promotes people with more followers and likes, which are bound to be more beautiful people. Unless you avoid any interest in tags related to people and see only beautiful bunnies, not ugly bunnies, your feed will be only beautiful creatures.
I don't know how you can deny that.
https://assets.opentoken.com/sha256/yhEqWEExzLtoLZ_fBRrGsyOD...
No, it does not.
There is a big difference between:
- showing you unconnected content you are likely to engage with
- having rules enforced with the help of human reviewers to prevent any user from getting recommendations with people deemed ugly/poor/etc.
The content you see depends on your interests. Making this up: if you regularly engage with topics that have a majority of fat people posting, say weight loss strategies, you will see a lot of fat people in Instagram Explore.
It's the difference between:
- Instagram: "I mostly see beautiful people" (because that's the content I and many users engage with).
- Tiktok: "I never see ugly people" (because the platform has a guideline that prevents that content from being shown to me)
Suppose 10 users on average interact with 2 non-ugly persons and 1 ugly person. People like commenting on the non-ugly people's content with "wow so pretty!" and "that's awesome! ", etc, etc while ugly people don't get as many comments and maybe even receive neutral to non-positive comments.
Now a new person signs up. They get recommend non-ugly people in their feed since that's more popular based on views and interactions.
Another new person signs up and they get the same recommendation, and so on.
After 100 new sign ups, the recommendation engine has 'learned' that majority of people prefer interacting with non-ugly people.
Another new user signs up and all they see in non-ugly people recommendations.
The end result is pretty much the same. Ugly people will get pushed out enough either by the programmatic learning engine that becomes over trained and biased, or by manual reviewers that filter content based on data that shows that non-ugly people bring in more users, otherwise they'd promote ugly people content if that was driving more interactions.
(I work at IG, but not on Explore)
If you cannot see this critical difference between enforced directive and choice of interest, then god help you.
by the same standard, you can see ugly people on tiktok, because they don't delete the post, they just supress it from popular feeds.
That's not what happens to me. Instagram consistently pushes model-type people to me even though I hardly ever interact with those types.
It kind of makes sense. Bad results can and do come out of well-intentioned decisions. In other areas (business, legislation) we judge policies by their actual effects, not by their creators' intentions.
Half of my explore is memes and infographics because that’s what I interact with a lot.
The older crowd also prefer to look at beautiful people.
I don't understand why you would need to actively encourage this, I don't believe Twitter would ever have people with “Abnormal body shape,” “ugly facial looks,” dwarfism, and “obvious beer belly,” “too many wrinkles,” “eye disorders,” and many other “low quality” features trending.
Instagram on the other hand is so beauty centric that it's created its own makeup aesthetic.
Anyway, I uploaded the most recent video on my phone as a test which was me getting my nostrils waxed in a Turkish Barbers. It hit the For You page and it's now got 360k views :-(
The only difference with Facebook is that it got crap from people who wanted it to be responsible for it's content (fake news), while TikTok gets crap from people who were not prepated for it to be so moderated, but it's still the same fundamental problem of trying to sit on both chairs at the same time.
Maybe you don't owe a country better, but you owe this community considerably better if you want to post here.
...oh.
But even apart from that, there is a litany of comments that broke the site guidelines. It's not like these were hard to find:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22321296
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22313537
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22447855
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22291539
> Under this policy, TikTok moderators were explicitly told to suppress uploads from users with flaws both congenital and inevitable. “Abnormal body shape,” “ugly facial looks,” dwarfism, and “obvious beer belly,” “too many wrinkles,” “eye disorders,” and many other “low quality” traits are all enough to keep uploads out of the algorithmic fire hose.
A TikTok spokesperson seems to confirm they are real guidelines, but won’t confirm how they were used.
> TikTok spokesperson Josh Gartner told The Intercept that “most of” the livestream guidelines reviewed by The Intercept “are either no longer in use, or in some cases appear to never have been in place,” but would not provide specifics.