Fancier algorithms are not bad per se. They can be ultra-productive for many purposes. In fact, we take no issue with fancy algorithms when published as software libraries. But then only specially trained folks can seize their fruit, which it happens it is people working for Big Tech. Now, if we had user interfaces that could let the user control several free parameters of the algorithms and experience different feeds, then it would be kinda nice. The problem boils down to these areas:

• near-universal social graphs (they have all the people enlisted)
• exert total control on the algorithm parameters
• infer personal and sensitive data points (user-modeling)
• not ensuring informed consent on the part of the user
• total behavioral surveillance (they collect every click)
• manipulate the feed and observe all behavioral response (essentially human subject research for ads)
• profiteering from the above while harming the user’s well being (unethical)

Political interference and proliferation of fascist “ideas” is just a function that is possible if and only if all of the above are in play. If you take all this destructive shit away, a software that would let you explore vast amounts of data with cool algorithms through a user-friendly interface would not be bad in itself.

But you see, that is why we say “the medium is the message” and that “television is not a neutral technology”. As a media system, television is so constructed so that few corporations can address the masses, not the other way round, nor people interact with their neighbor. For a brief point in time, the internet promised to subvert that, when centralized social media brought back the exertion of control over the messaging by few corporations. The current alternative is the Fediverse and P2P networks. This is my analysis.

If you model and infer some aspect of the user that is considered personal (eg de-anonymize) or sensitive (eg infer sexuality) by means of an inference system, then you are in the area of GDPR. Further use of these inferred data down the pipeline can be construed as unethical. If they want to be transparent about it they have to open-source their user-modeling and decision making system.

a reality warping engine.

Now you’re talking.

You think the Meta algorithm just sorts the feed for you? It is way more complex and it basically puts you on some very fine-grained clusters, then decides what to show to you, then collects your clicks and reactions and adjusts itself. For scale, no academic “research with human subjects” would be approved with mechanics like that under the hood. It is deeply unethical and invasive, outright dangerous for the individuals (eg teen self esteem issues, anorexias, etc, etc). So “algorithm-like features” is apples to oranges here.

Non-consensual user-modeling systems should be heavily regulated.

I am not subscribing to this bullshit, and I am sad my comment enabled you to spew it out. “Me too” was a valid and necessary movement to combat sexual assaults that were institutionalized in many industries and protected by law enforcement and judicial authorities. Many prominent figures went rightfully to jail for sex crimes, and the proportion of women lying about it is rather small to make a political argument off it. Tracing back “liberal-themed supremacy movements” to Jewish supremacism sounds to me quite close to Nazi conspiracy theory, to take any of this seriously. I am sorry this reached my feed, and I can’t wait to engage the likes of you in combat.

Sure it isn’t. Let’s review this when the state does the same thing lol.

Is this why we should not delegate the control of hate speech to the state, because it will always blow up in our faces?

This might be out of context for the article, but once we are in /c/technology get this: GIMP is a slur, and their slogan during startup is “we glitch because we twitch” which makes me want to kick them in the nuts every time I use the fucking software.

All this is speculative of course, but those domains you listed are vanity domains in lucrative markets. I call them vanity domains, because it can easily set you back 3-4 figures to get a domain like me.blog , let alone yourname.cars which is quite desirable if you sell cars. As with everything else, domain prices are simply subject to the laws of supply and demand.

Regarding .io , compared to average country code domains, such as .de for example, that tend to be quite modestly priced, .io has seen substantial increase in the past 5 or so years, transformed from a geeky exoticism to a symbol of AI-hype tech companies.

At least from my perspective.

I see. Do you think it is a honeypot?

I share your sentiment. But from a technical point of view, I can’t fathom interactive maps without javascript, which is typically blocked by hardened browsers. TBF I think their cause would be better served if they open sourced their data so that people could explore them with arbitrary clients.

I don’t think anyone took those seriously as private messengers. On another note, I think Maduro cracked down on WhatsApp as well, and called Venezuelans to cancel Meta altogether. Or something.