"net neutrality"

[athousandsmiles]

I found this on my friend's list. It's just over 9 minutes, but worth the time.

For those who'd rather have the tl;dr version, the internet is tailoring itself, via algorithms, to what it thinks we want to see. As the guy in the vid put it (paraphrasing here), "We may not be getting a balanced information diet." It's disturbing.

And I want to add a comment from one of my friends, which I thought was interesting and relevant, but I want to get her permission first.



At uni we have developed an algorithm once that would lay over google, visible of course that would just blend out certain things based on what string you entered into the search bar. And to be honest it was really easy, because there are certain keywords that get liked with other keywords that would be just blended out. (eg I could google for House and the algorithm would give you results about House, Hugh and so on, but basically ignore everything with RSL in it for example. without you knowing that there was a result with House and RSL)

I think this is the first step into the loss of net neutrality. Which would be fatal! If you are not familiar with that concept, take a look at that link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9jHOn0EW8U

The problem is that all these algorithms are designed to help you get the best of information based on who you are. It's the same amazon uses for "customers also bought" or recommendations, but what happens is that you are pulled inside a bubble, as the commentator said and as a consequence you can't look outside of the bubble, because you don't know that there is an outside.
It's difficult, because it's easier to compare things and show smilier items to you, than completely difficult items, because when you like 1/10 topics, 9/10 topics could be something you like but should the computer give you now 9 completely different, irrelevant (to choice #1) choices? You would think, well what does that have to do with anything... and so on.

I know I'm rambling here but this is such an interesting topic. When does become a recommendation on things you might like, become basically a tool that "forces" you to ignore things that are outside the box? And when do we draw the line on what information (personal) do I, the user, provide to the internet.
Because if you say, no no, don't take any personal information, then things like "you might also like" and so on don't work either.

Comments

[izuko.livejournal.com]

Isn't that the "structural imbalance" that liberals have been using for a long time to demand "equality time" in the only medium where they don't have nearly monopolistic control?

[izuko.livejournal.com]

On watching it, I can see... yep. He's pining for the days when his side controlled the debate. Note:

• He says we NEEEEEEEEED to be shown things that make us uncomfortable. Who is he to force that on us? Who decides which uncomfortable things we need to see?


• He says that the "imperfect" gatekeepers of the 20th century saw us through said century. Really? So did the world somehow come to an end BEFORE the 20th century, and the previous models didn't see us through their periods? What is the difference between media optimized for sales and media optimized for the long march through the institutions?


• He ignores that we can choose our own sources in the internet age, even if it's picking our own gatekeepers. I can go to National Review Online. I can go to Drudge. I can go to Huffington Post. I can go to Daily KOS. Under his preferred model, I didn't have that choice.


• Let's not forget the oh-so shining example his gatekeepers showed in 2008. We still don't know jack about Obama, but we've heard all about the theory that Trig is Todd and Bristol's baby. If that's the "uncomfortable" information that he wants added to my real news, he can take a hike.


• Let's not forget that he got to make that speech because he fit his gatekeepers' ideals.

So... basically, I think he's the same as the other dictatorial progs.

[mosinging1986.livejournal.com]

On FB and Google's selective editing - I had no idea they do that, or that it was even possible!

This filtering done by search tools and other sites may indeed be a problem. This is the first I've heard of it, so I can't even begin to speculate on how to solve it.

But to have a guy who at the outset admits he's a liberal - sorry, they call themselves "progressives" now - being the one suggesting how to correct the problem, knowing that he'll do so according to the views liberals hold? Now that's scary.

For example, listen to him at the end talking about "journalistic ethics". I nearly snorted out loud. There's such a thing? You mean on this planet, the one where news reporting is dominated by liberal views?

[merig00.livejournal.com]

FB by default filters out people you haven't interacted with in the last 2 weeks or so. It's very comfortable because if you have like 400 people in your list you don't want to scroll through 400 updates. They also split your news feed into Top News and Most Recent (in Most Recent drop down menu -> settings, you can change whose updates you want to see).

Same goes for Google. The different topic tabs are there for a reason.

[merig00.livejournal.com]

so much bs in that TED video I don't even know where to begin... Not even mentioning the youtube video.

[kelincihutan.livejournal.com]

I like this video, because that's something I do worry about. I don't want to get stuck in an echo chamber, never hearing an opposing viewpoint. If nothing else, it's good practice learning how to pick apart someone else's argument. Since he calls himself "progressive," my impression is that I would disagree with him about nearly everything ever, but I agree that it is good to keep up with the other side.

Granted, being in fandom as a conservative will wake you up quick on a Monday morning sometimes, so I usually have that base pretty well covered... :)

Yes. I'm new. Is this a terrible first post?

[athousandsmiles]

Welcome. My reaction was the same as yours, so some of the other comments here surprised me, which is kind of amusing given that the whole point of the video is being exposed to opposing points of view. :-p