[HN Gopher] Afraid to Google a thing because I don't want the al...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Afraid to Google a thing because I don't want the algorithm to
       think I like it
        
       Author : edward
       Score  : 90 points
       Date   : 2021-05-08 10:17 UTC (12 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (twitter.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (twitter.com)
        
       | smitty1e wrote:
       | Sounds like an opportunity for a search proxy service.
       | 
       | Which begets an arms race of proxies, and fake proxies sponsored
       | by Google, fuzz proxies blowing up the signal-to-noise ratio for
       | your account, TOR proxies for the "double-hush-hush" searches. .
       | .
       | 
       | Who knew that the act of finding stuff would be such a
       | voyeuristic delight?
        
       | mrweasel wrote:
       | The dumb thing about recommendation algorithms are that they
       | assume that I'd like the same things, regardless of my mood or
       | current situation. YouTube Music at least try to make guesses
       | based on the time of day, but fail to take the actual music into
       | account and just focus on the bands, and not the tempo, lyrics
       | and overall sound of a track.
       | 
       | The only "algorithm" that sort of work is Amazons book
       | recommendation, but I'm not sure that not just based on what
       | others have bought.
        
       | diegocg wrote:
       | Disable your search history
        
       | realreality wrote:
       | In the novel, "Feed", one of the characters has a hobby of
       | searching for all sorts of random things, in order to confuse the
       | algorithms. She would add absurd items to her shopping cart,
       | without buying any of them.
       | 
       | The book, written in 2002, was very prescient.
        
       | anticensor wrote:
       | You can remove individual items from your search history.
        
       | LudwigNagasena wrote:
       | Even in a tweet about algorithms the guy can't help but dunk on
       | men to show what a nice guy he is.
        
         | anotha1 wrote:
         | Weak ad hominem attack. Not sure why you wasted a comment for
         | it.
        
           | fuzxi wrote:
           | I missed the part where this was a debate
        
           | nvilcins wrote:
           | I think your comment better applies to the tweet being
           | referred to, though, not sure "ad hominem" extends to a group
           | of unspecified people.
        
             | HKH2 wrote:
             | I can't see why stereotyping (especially that which is
             | uncharitable) shouldn't be classed as an ad hominem attack.
        
               | marrs wrote:
               | Is observing that someone conforms to a stereotype the
               | same as stereotyping them though?
        
         | happytoexplain wrote:
         | The comment you're referring to didn't occur in the tweet about
         | algorithms - it was a reactive comment that occurred in
         | response to an experience that happened after the tweet. Also,
         | I'm not sure what "to show what a nice guy he is" means here,
         | though I'm guessing it's just being used an insult in the same
         | family as "white knight".
         | 
         | I can't know whether his comment was reasonable without looking
         | through the comments he was referring to (and neither can you),
         | but even given that he was being unreasonable, you chose to be
         | unreasonable in turn.
        
         | aulin wrote:
         | I had a good laugh because that's actually a comment against
         | the mansplaining common narrative, people will jump to explain
         | things everytime they feel it's easy to add their contribute,
         | being the audience a woman or a random guy on the internet or
         | anyone they perceive weak enough to be a good target to show
         | off their knowledge and skills
        
           | justwalt wrote:
           | I think that's a really cynical way to look at it, especially
           | when the explanations are public. People can explain things
           | to others without there being a hidden power dynamic.
        
           | DangitBobby wrote:
           | > Update: random dudes are now saying the unsolicited toxic
           | replies are actually _my_ fault for saying something in the
           | first place. So NOW I feel like I 've gotten a little glimpse
           | of what it's like to be a woman on the internet.
           | 
           | I was very curious about how this is evidence that women
           | specifically get berated on the internet rather than evidence
           | that everyone is a potential target. Obviously from this
           | interaction alone you can't tell if it happens more to women
           | or not but... I thought it was kind of funny to say "this
           | thing happened to me as a man and now I really understand
           | that this thing happens to women."
        
           | happytoexplain wrote:
           | How is an example in another context a "comment against the
           | mansplaining common narrative"? Even your explanation makes
           | it pretty clear that a man-to-woman combination would be one
           | of the most common versions.
        
             | aulin wrote:
             | He's the one who extrapolated the context, my point is that
             | the explainer does it for reasons that have nothing to do
             | with the gender of the receiver. And this is one example
        
         | robertwx wrote:
         | Rainbow, BLM, it's all there, so he can afford the sharp
         | reaction towards the "random dudes".
         | 
         | Without the protective ideological shield, that reaction would
         | have been deemed "hostile" and "toxic" by the twitteria.
        
         | domnomnom wrote:
         | Lmao good catch. Can someone explain the alternate reality we
         | seem to exist in? Do y'all see these people around a lot?
        
       | rexf wrote:
       | Is there a term for using Google services less to minimize your
       | risk of inadvertently running into a ban happy algorithm? I
       | realize the thing to do is not rely on their services, but that's
       | _much_ easier said than done
        
         | gostsamo wrote:
         | Auto censorship is the general term.
        
       | dusted wrote:
       | ctrl + shift + p
        
         | hoppla wrote:
         | Now my printer also knows what I read
        
           | capableweb wrote:
           | Ah the confusion of application-specific shortcuts VS OS-
           | global ones... You're clearly a Chrome user :)
        
             | hoppla wrote:
             | I use both Firefox and Chrome. So I see the print dialog
             | too often
        
       | DoomHotel wrote:
       | Use Firefox Focus on mobile.
       | 
       | On desktop, set Firefox to purge everything when closing the
       | browser. Use Chrome only when necessary to do strictly Google-
       | related things.
        
       | weeweww32 wrote:
       | Should've used NORDVPN FOR ONLY 2,75 A MONTH!
        
       | franciscop wrote:
       | Ah the solution is simple, technology is advanced enough that you
       | can easily build a music player yourself with local files.
       | 
       | (this is a HN joke)
       | 
       | (but I did start building my own music player)
       | 
       | https://twitter.com/FPresencia/status/1379765168482172940
        
       | krono wrote:
       | It's so weird, across all Google's products I occasionally get
       | these weird Arabic and sometimes even Islamic content
       | suggestions.
       | 
       | I've never opened any of these links, am not behind a VPN, am
       | very much not Arabic and do not understand the language, and -
       | with all due respect - am completely uninterested in Islamic holy
       | scripture.
       | 
       | Why, even after all these years, Google thinks this is content
       | I'd want to see is a complete mystery to me. Something I'm going
       | to have to live with for the rest of my life it seems.
        
         | dvfjsdhgfv wrote:
         | I can think of several explanations. The least likely is that
         | for some reason your IP (or one of the IPs) is misattributed to
         | another country by their geolocation mapping system. Another is
         | that some of your property have been used by an Arab (you bough
         | a second-hand device, lost a phone etc). More probably ones:
         | one of your devices might have been infected or you might have
         | clicked an ad that was disguised by something else but was
         | linked to products/services offered in Arabic.
        
           | krono wrote:
           | Yes those are the only explanations I came up with as well,
           | but none of that applies.
           | 
           | I have kept a log of all IPs I regularly connected from, and
           | only a single one of those originated in another country -
           | another European one.
           | 
           | Never lost a device (jinxed now) or bought or even
           | temporarily used a second-hand one.
           | 
           | An ad or intrusion do seem to be the most likely culprits,
           | but ads are blocked everywhere, and I believe my security
           | hygiene to be pretty decent.
           | 
           | This has been going on for over a decade now. Due to the
           | sporadic nature if these happenings, I'm almost starting to
           | think there's some old (but still wrong) data stuck on some
           | edge node somewhere - or perhaps someone at Google is
           | actively teasing me for being so critical of the company :)
        
       | MaxBarraclough wrote:
       | Use a private browsing/incognito window then. Not bullet-proof,
       | but probably good enough.
        
       | aulin wrote:
       | the thing I hate the most are personalized ads and amazon
       | suggestions that keep pestering you for weeks about an item you
       | just bought and don't need anymore
        
         | azureel wrote:
         | You bought a cable for your phone yesterday. Why don't you buy
         | another one? Don't you wanna buy? You sure? Here are the best
         | single cables in your area ready to be hooked.
        
       | salakotolu wrote:
       | Personalized feeds are broken. I think there's work to be done to
       | improve content discovery.
        
       | jackjeff wrote:
       | Fair enough.
       | 
       | But to what extent would the algorithm know about you if you
       | clear cookies/storage data though? I also imagine changing IP
       | addresses help... does Google use IP as a source for profiling?
        
         | nichch wrote:
         | I can't speak for what data points Google uses for tracking,
         | however... with JavaScript, there is a plethora of information
         | that can be used to uniquely identify you across IPs, and even
         | across browsers. [0]
         | 
         | If you're logged in to a service on multiple devices you have
         | now linked multiple fingerprints to your account that can be
         | compared against third party data.
         | 
         | A VPN will not protect you from this tracking.
         | 
         | [0] https://amiunique.org/
         | 
         | (I've plugged this site before, so I feel like I should say I
         | am not affiliated with it)
        
       | stephc_int13 wrote:
       | I feel the same, and I stopped using Chrome, Gmail, Google Search
       | and Facebook quite a long time ago.
       | 
       | I am not afraid, but annoyed to not have "manual mode" internet
       | where everything I do has no hidden consequences and is simply
       | what I asked.
        
       | werid wrote:
       | It's annoying clicking some youtube link only to find it was
       | something you really don't want more of, and then youtube proceed
       | to recommend much more of it, even though you barely watched any
       | of it.
       | 
       | kinda forces me to watch something else that is new but at least
       | somewhat wanted in an attempt to make the algorithm look at the
       | new shiny i'm interested in and forget the previous one.
       | 
       | i find it funny though when amazon still make recommendations to
       | me based on a purchase in 1998. yes, Jeff, i still want to buy
       | wrestling VHS tapes...
        
         | trickstra wrote:
         | use Invidious https://docs.invidious.io/Invidious-Instances.md
        
         | shp0ngle wrote:
         | You can delete your YouTube history, which will make the
         | recommendations usually disappear.
        
           | cookguyruffles wrote:
           | I never log into YouTube and this still happens, it's at
           | least in part keyed to IP address
        
           | beforeolives wrote:
           | This will kind of clean up your current recommendations but
           | it doesn't reset the recommendation algorithm like it used
           | to. The algorithm still retains memory of your past
           | behaviour.
           | 
           | For example if I consistently listen to 3 unrelated songs [A
           | B C] on youtube together, the algorithm will regularly
           | recommend them to me (because of my unique behaviour, not
           | because they're similar). If I reset my history and then
           | listen to song A, then B and C get immediately recommended
           | even though they aren't similar to A and they don't exist in
           | my listening history which means that the information about
           | my listening/browsing habits is still there in the
           | recommendation model.
        
             | TchoBeer wrote:
             | If you turn off watch history is basically only suggests
             | stuff based on subscriptions which is much better imo and I
             | never need the history feature anyway.
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | eCa wrote:
         | Click the three dots and then either "Not interested" or "Don't
         | recommend channel".
         | 
         | Seems to work reasonably well for me.
        
           | aulin wrote:
           | really annoying if you mostly watch youtube from a tv (unless
           | there's way to do that from the youtube app in e.g. amazon
           | firetv)
        
           | Measter wrote:
           | It doesn't in my experience. I've been telling it I don't
           | want to see: news, politics, music, or reaction videos for
           | months. It still puts them there.
           | 
           | Last week it decided that I wanted to see rap videos and
           | filled my feed with them. I don't listen to rap. I've never
           | watched a rap video. I've told it I'm not interested in every
           | single video, but it still puts them there.
        
             | makomk wrote:
             | Not sure it'll do much about news videos - Google seems to
             | force the same presumably hand-picked selection of news
             | videos onto everyone's front page, generally covering the
             | kind of political topics tech workers think everyone should
             | hear about.
        
             | ripply wrote:
             | Try going through your watch history/liked videos and
             | deleting things if it's really bothering you, I watched a
             | bunch of political videos a few years ago and got burnt out
             | so I deleted every one (took a few hours) and my
             | recommendations instantly changed
        
           | Ticklee wrote:
           | I wish someone would make an extension that makes this a
           | simple hover+keypress instead of multiple clicks. As it
           | stands right now it is too much of a hassle to manually click
           | 2 times per video. But if you do not then youtube will
           | continue to plaster that video on your homescreen for weeks.
        
           | alpaca128 wrote:
           | What if it's from a channel I like but don't want to watch
           | that one video...will clicking on this reduce suggestions
           | from this channel, will it do nothing, will it unsubscribe me
           | from that channel(as has happened in the past), ...?
           | 
           | Nobody knows, I only know I don't want to play this game.
        
             | smichel17 wrote:
             | Use Firefox multi-account containers and the temporary
             | containers add-on. Now your YouTube starts fresh with every
             | new tab. It's actually nice, it means you get to build a
             | new set of recommendations each time you open a tab, and
             | because YT doesn't have that much data on you yet, the
             | recommendations are directly linked to the thing you're
             | currently watching, similar to how it used to be before the
             | whole tracking extravaganza.
        
               | atatatat wrote:
               | Or use different folders of portable Chromium so you have
               | any semblance of sandboxing + security.
        
               | medstrom wrote:
               | Temporary Containers is a pretty amazing sandbox already,
               | as it uses a builtin Firefox feature.
        
               | dvfjsdhgfv wrote:
               | More or less. Sadly, they still suggest a ton of stuff
               | based on geolocation.
        
             | Mordisquitos wrote:
             | The best way of not playing this game is to, well... not
             | play it. Why should you pay any attention to what YouTube
             | "suggests" you should watch? I just treat YouTube as a
             | service that hosts videos, with a mediocre search feature,
             | and I have no interest in what it thinks I should watch.
             | 
             | If a real human mentions a video that piques my interest, I
             | may watch it. If I'm interested in finding a video on a
             | particular topic, or a specific scene from this-or-that
             | film or TV show, I will search for it myself. If am
             | interested enough in a certain producer's content, I may
             | "subscribe" to them, but I will be the judge if I want to
             | watch the latest video they uploaded.
        
               | tarboreus wrote:
               | This is the correct answer.
        
               | dvfjsdhgfv wrote:
               | > Why should you pay any attention to what YouTube
               | "suggests" you should watch?
               | 
               | There is one advantage: some obscure music videos. There
               | are some rare pearls with the comments section almost
               | exclusively thanking YT algorithm for taking them there.
               | Happened to me so many times that I have a separate
               | browser instance and a Google account for YT and I'm very
               | careful what I click when I use it.
        
               | Mordisquitos wrote:
               | True, you do have a point there. I'll admit I have
               | discovered a few bands/musicians by just leaving YouTube
               | on autoplay, after having searched for specific artists I
               | already knew to concentrate while working ( _before_ lo-
               | fi hip hop was trending!).
        
               | mannykannot wrote:
               | This brings us right back to square one: are the benefits
               | of the recommending algorithms worth the downside? We can
               | make that choice.
        
           | solarkraft wrote:
           | I've been trying it for a few months. I dutifully clicked
           | away every preposterously stupid clickbait title or thumbnail
           | and topic I didn't care about. It had no noticeable effect.
        
         | alpaca128 wrote:
         | Yes, I always hesitate to mark YT videos as unwanted because
         | often it's from a channel I otherwise like a lot and I have no
         | idea how YT will behave after that. Considering the site is
         | known for even auto-cancelling subscriptions sometimes it feels
         | like a UX minefield.
        
         | JoeyBananas wrote:
         | You should use the dislike button to let the algorithm know
         | that you didn't enjoy the video.
        
         | gentleman11 wrote:
         | It's better if you click that stuff, it causes the algorithm to
         | recommend stuff you don't care about, which means less YouTube
         | holes to get sucked into
        
         | spamalot159 wrote:
         | It's frustrating that nowadays YouTube seems like it can only
         | keep 3 or 4 types of videos that you like in its head. I feel
         | like I'm watching the same thing over and over whenever I click
         | on recommendations. I totally agree with you.
        
         | travoltaj wrote:
         | YouTube's personalization recommendation is a nightmare. Just
         | the other day, YouTube played "Billie eilish -copycat" for me
         | literally after every other song.
         | 
         | I pretty much only YouTube in Incognito mode these days.
         | Everytime I forget, YouTube manages to annoy me so much within
         | half an hour that I switch to Incognito again.
        
       | 627467 wrote:
       | It's funny, just today I noticed how much _worse_ is Google Now
       | feed (or whatever it 's called today) because it keeps repeating
       | news items and category that I have very little interest in. It's
       | almost like Google is trying to save money by computing less
       | accurately for my interests.
        
       | wodenokoto wrote:
       | I think Netflix is the worst offender.
       | 
       | If you spend a minute too long looking at the menu for a movie it
       | will not only auto play, but for the foreseeable future Netflix
       | will assume you're watching it, want to finish watching it and
       | watch similar stuff.
       | 
       | More than most other services Netflix doesn't trust your ratings
       | or your lists when making up recommendations.
        
         | emrah wrote:
         | You can delete half watched things from your history so they
         | don't show up in the main UI
        
         | pseudalopex wrote:
         | You can turn off auto play FYI.
        
         | mrweasel wrote:
         | Netflix apparently have no idea what I like. Well maybe they
         | do, but don't actually that type of content, so they just throw
         | random junk at me.
        
       | crispyambulance wrote:
       | I don't know how common this is, but I've gotten into the habit
       | of creating "personas"-- different users that have different
       | habits and are interested in different things, yet all me.
       | 
       | It's insane that I feel it helpful to take on "multiple
       | personalities", but there it is.
       | 
       | Part of it is that these algorithms are fairly one-track. They
       | can mix it up a bit, but it's always too much of one thing and
       | too little of another. They can't truly comport with the reality
       | that someone can have multiple interests and tastes.
        
         | MaxBarraclough wrote:
         | This is what Bruce Schneier calls _distorting_ digital
         | surveillance. His taxonomy also includes avoiding, blocking,
         | and breaking (i.e. crime).
         | 
         | https://www.huffpost.com/entry/data-and-goliath-digital-surv...
        
         | throwaway82003 wrote:
         | On desktop Firefox has Multi Account Containers and Profiles.
         | 
         | https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/containers
         | 
         | https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/profile-manager-create-...
        
         | cblconfederate wrote:
         | another solution is to use 2 instances of chrome or firefox
         | with different --user-data-dir which can run in parallel . It's
         | actually very convenient for checking up stuff without
         | 'messing' the main setup
        
           | scoopertrooper wrote:
           | Why not use the built-in profile functionality?
        
             | mschuster91 wrote:
             | God knows if Google does any kind of cross-correlation
             | between them. I would actually expect it.
        
               | scoopertrooper wrote:
               | They are also part of the Chromium project, so you're
               | welcome to check it out, inspect the source code, and
               | build it locally.
        
               | thiht wrote:
               | Just because it's open doesn't mean anyone can do such
               | thing. I'm a professional dev and I can't browse such a
               | complex C++ codebase.
        
             | cblconfederate wrote:
             | can you use them in parallel? in any case i don't want any
             | correlation between the two (other than the IP i guess). in
             | my case i often log in to the same website from different
             | accounts for testing purposes
        
               | scoopertrooper wrote:
               | You can you them in parallel and they share no
               | extensions, sessions, website settings, or other local
               | data. You can even have separate themes for each profile.
               | 
               | I'm unaware of any potential problems relating to
               | fingerprinting and so on, but for your use case it
               | doesn't sound like it'd be a problem.
        
           | smichel17 wrote:
           | Firefox multi-account containers, no?
        
           | isaacimagine wrote:
           | I have multiple about:profiles on Firefox, each with
           | different accounts (think school vs personal vs work etc.)
           | Works quite well.
        
       | greshario wrote:
       | Use duckduckgo and this is a non-issue.
        
         | Garlef wrote:
         | I tried it and went back to google because google saves me
         | time.
         | 
         | As a dev, I google a lot to figure out how to do X.
         | 
         | My experience with DuckDuckGo was that it added 2-10 minutes of
         | filtering for usable results every time.
        
           | stephc_int13 wrote:
           | I am using DuckDuckGo and my experience is completely
           | different, but I might be missing something.
           | 
           | Do you have an example of a search you've done where the
           | results were much better from Google Search than from
           | DuckDuckGo?
        
             | mrweasel wrote:
             | My experience is that we reached a point where if
             | DuckDuckGo can't find something, then neither can Google.
             | For local search Google is still a little better, but they
             | choosen to drown out actual results with ads.
        
               | Garlef wrote:
               | This might be true. But my point was that DuckDuckGo
               | costs me too much time. To rephrase it: DuckDuckGo is
               | more expensive to use. (At least for me).
        
               | greshario wrote:
               | Not my experience for dev related searches. I assume this
               | is because Google has learned I always search for JS
               | stuff and I've gotten used to that so I'm not specific
               | enough in my searches on DDG.
        
             | lehi wrote:
             | _> Do you have an example of a search you 've done where
             | the results were much better from Google Search than from
             | DuckDuckGo?_
             | 
             | Here you go: https://imgur.com/a/CssDXS3
        
             | Garlef wrote:
             | > Do you have an example of a search ...
             | 
             | Due to the very topic this HN post is about, I don't think
             | this is a good method - your results might be vastly
             | different from mine.
             | 
             | But let's look at the number of relevant results among the
             | top 5 results for some thing I recently wanted to learn
             | about.
             | 
             | "Comprehension categories" - a rather specific term from
             | category theory
             | 
             | https://www.google.com/search?q=comprehension+category
             | https://duckduckgo.com/?q=comprehension+category
             | 
             | Google: 5/5 (for me) DuckDuckGo: 1/5 (for me)
        
               | mdpye wrote:
               | You have to be explicit about the context if you've
               | chosen to dump the implicit bundle of context.
               | 
               | "comprehension categories category theory" 5/5
               | 
               | I'd hardly say it's 2 to 10 minutes extra work,
               | especially for such an obvious example
        
               | smichel17 wrote:
               | "Comprehension categories theory" works as well.
        
         | azureel wrote:
         | I think this reply is for you
         | 
         | https://twitter.com/jjcollinsworth/status/139066623945075507...
        
           | jessaustin wrote:
           | Women just love it when random internet dudes pull the "if I
           | were a woman you couldn't point out how trite and pointless
           | my complaint is, so let's just assume I am a woman and you
           | shut up now" card. It's so cool for them to be the exemplars
           | of the trite and the pointless.
        
           | pessimizer wrote:
           | To spell it out: it takes an increasing amount of effort to
           | avoid any of your interests being tracked, logged, and almost
           | immediately used in ways that you _already know_ will be
           | destructive. This is also an IT professional and a programmer
           | saying this, so they do not want your advice. The fact that
           | they can use many, many countermeasures which require many,
           | many rabbitholes of research, that as a programmer they are
           | able to understand (although they will have to be continually
           | updated) is not a way to fix that fear _it 's the
           | manifestation of that fear._
           | 
           | After 9/11 and the Patriot Act, librarians fought the
           | government to keep the reading habits of patrons private _as
           | a core duty_ like doctors pledge to _do no harm_. Now it 's
           | difficult to get people to understand why clicking through to
           | an attractive hammock while browsing Amazon registering in
           | 900 databases and manifesting in ads and cold calls selling
           | tropical vacations and being flagged on some government
           | system as 2% more likely to be a flight risk if let out on
           | bond (who am I kidding, AI doesn't give percentages, it just
           | gives conclusions, looking at a hammock might be that stray
           | pixel that can turn an OCR "O" into a "Q") - difficult to get
           | some people to understand why that would _make you nervous._
           | 
           | The answer to that isn't "use TOR to get to a VPN to browse
           | amazon, and pay for that with a burner debit card loaded with
           | bitcoin" or whatever works this week. _There isn 't really a
           | hammock._
           | 
           | edit: also Amazon has that figured out, some researcher there
           | figured out that they can identify you based on your click
           | patterns and timing. Right now you can choose between 1) an
           | app that will just click on everything silently, or 2)
           | another app by a professor at some midwestern university that
           | will jerk around the timing and positioning of your clicks in
           | a way that throws your fingerprint off. The first app has
           | been banned by every store, and triggers 80 warnings and a
           | waiver that has to be signed with two-factor even if you
           | manage to root your phone and sideload it. You have to
           | compile the second app yourself, with a weird toolchain, and
           | it draws in 640Mb of npm libraries. It's already been updated
           | three times in response to Amazon's countermeasures, and the
           | professor just wrote a paper about the entire method probably
           | being ultimately doomed.
        
           | fuzxi wrote:
           | "I complained on a public forum and received advice. What a
           | horrible day to have an internet connection."
        
           | 0-_-0 wrote:
           | Wow this guy loves to be a victim in as many ways as possible
           | to squeeze into 3 tweets! This must be a kind of a Twitter
           | archetype.
        
       | thrower123 wrote:
       | Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from
       | magic, and induces magical thinking.
       | 
       | This is a quarter step away from voodoo and south seas cargo cult
       | rituals.
        
       | skrebbel wrote:
       | I'm mildly curious about the whole Jordan Peterson anti-woke
       | movement. Mildly, as in, I'm interested in the arguments but I
       | often don't agree with them. I once made the mistake of clicking
       | on a Peterson YouTube video and subsequently got only obscene
       | alt-right "Peterson KILLS stupid feminist reporter!!" type of
       | edited content. Like at some point 80% of my suggestions was crap
       | like that, drowning out all the lovely nerdy Tom Scott stuff I
       | come to YouTube for.
       | 
       | I had to reset all suggestions to get away from it. Whenever I
       | now see a video like that about the culture wars (or about covid
       | for that matter), I open an incognito browser and search for the
       | title. It's _nuts_ that this is necessary.
       | 
       | It's come to a point that I now hate suggestion engines with a
       | passion. I wish I could simply only see the
       | tweets/videos/whatever from people I follow/subscribe,
       | chronologically. I can't figure out whether the people making
       | these services are simply incompetent or downright evil.
       | 
       | The AI future is now and it's awful.
        
         | f00zz wrote:
         | Go to accounts.google.com, and under Data & Personalization >
         | Activity Controls you'll find options to disable YouTube
         | suggestions based on your history. I have everything disabled
         | (history, personalized ads, everything), and I only get
         | suggestions for channels I subscribed or videos I liked.
        
         | KozmoNau7 wrote:
         | It's a consequence of the algorithm optimizing for engagement.
         | YT obviously wants people to stay for as long as possible, to
         | interact, write comments, upvote/downvote and follow the chain
         | of recommended videos. The longer they stay on YT and the more
         | content the consume, the more ads YT can show and the more
         | money they make.
         | 
         | Anti-woke/alt-right type content is provocative, controversial
         | and makes people engage with. Either because they want to
         | enthusiastically join in or because they want to dunk on it for
         | how ridiculous it is. And the people who are into it are
         | generally _really_ into it, so they 'll keep watching hour
         | after hour of it.
         | 
         | YT doesn't care, as long as they get as many people watching
         | videos and looking at ads as they possibly can.
        
           | skrebbel wrote:
           | > And the people who are into it are generally _really_ into
           | it, so they 'll keep watching hour after hour of it.
           | 
           | Maybe that's the effect and not the cause.
        
             | KozmoNau7 wrote:
             | I see it as a self-sustaining loop at this point. At some
             | point the flames were lit and fanned, and now they've taken
             | on a life of their own.
        
         | phendrenad2 wrote:
         | I think that in the future, having a way to tell the algorithm
         | "I didn't like this" will be common courtesy. Especially as the
         | algorithm becomes stronger, I.E. companies offload more and
         | more curation to ML.
        
         | domnomnom wrote:
         | It's going to kill us
        
         | chiefalchemist wrote:
         | Same. Worse is the fact it continues to make the same
         | suggestions no matter how many times I scroll past, no matter
         | how many other videos I watch.
         | 
         | I find Spotify similar. I try a suggested playlist. I check out
         | after 2 or 3 songs. It doesn't get the hint.
        
       | solarkraft wrote:
       | I like recommendation features in principle. I don't want an
       | unfiltered feed of stuff.
       | 
       | It would just be nice if they were configurable, understandable
       | and actually worked for me. Some systems' "We're showing you this
       | because ..." is an important first step, but it needs to go way,
       | way, further.
       | 
       | Big companies probably don't do it because they're afraid of
       | overwhelming a user, disclosing too much about their own
       | algorithm and the things they know ("We're showing you this
       | because someone you hung out with on Instagram just before you
       | met").
       | 
       | Thus it's probably up to open source projects again to make
       | algorithms that actually work for people, not against them.
       | 
       | Are there any such projects already? Are there projects trying to
       | dissect common proprietary recommendation systems? They're some
       | of the most mysterious influences on current society.
        
       | Nihilartikel wrote:
       | On YouTube I create multiple channels to curate my
       | recommendations. I have multi modal tastes but most
       | recommendation systems don't really seem to deal with feedback
       | that spans independent interests very well.
       | 
       | So, one channel for how-to's, crafting, and tech talks. One for
       | instrumental and foreign language focus music, etc..
        
       | asadkn wrote:
       | Sure lots of negatives, but in a few cases, it can also be
       | useful. I have carefully used a YouTube account that's
       | specifically trained for just the right music recommendations
       | that the auto-play just works mostly right.
       | 
       | I use stimulating music (not relaxing) for work mainly, playing
       | in background, and don't want to keep finding new music. Novelty
       | is an important factor in stimulatory music. So this has been
       | great for me.
        
       | failwhaleshark wrote:
       | Don't use Google to search. DDG!
        
       | sas41 wrote:
       | It's crazy just how much I go out of my way to avoid things that
       | "personalize" my experience.
       | 
       | I don't use online music services, I discover music on various
       | platforms and and download mp3s and keep a local library.
       | 
       | I avoid Youtube at it's defaults, I use 3rd party apps and VLC to
       | do most of my watching, other than my subscriptions I tend to
       | skim the Home page very rarely.
       | 
       | I do not use Netflix or other streaming services, I try to hunt
       | down DVDs/Blu-Rays and prefer ripping them for my personal
       | library.
       | 
       | My only problem is exclusives, as a fan of The Witcher series, I
       | do feel like I am missing out, but if I feel a really strong urge
       | I can always borrow an account from a friend, create a temp
       | profile, watch the series and delete it.
       | 
       | Their convenience features just add more inconvenience to me.
        
       | CyberRabbi wrote:
       | The height of first world inconvenience
        
       | qualudeheart wrote:
       | You should abstain from googling politically incorrect ideas. It
       | is possible that the state will require searches for for
       | politically incorrect content be logged and used to create a
       | profile on possible dissidents.
        
       | idatum wrote:
       | Put in an old DVD of Dr. Strangelove:... recently in the XBox. It
       | was just a random thought to pop it in and enjoy. (okay, was
       | cleaning up shelf)
       | 
       | I eventually realized I could skip around and enjoy the parts I
       | liked. Freely. Without that feeling of being watched.
       | 
       | Flashback.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-05-08 23:01 UTC)