Markets put bsky exceeding twitter at 44%, 4x higher than mastodon. My P would be around 80%. I don’t think most people (who use social media much in the first place) are proud to be on twitter. The algorithm has been horrific for a while and bsky at least offers algorithmic choice (but only one feed right now is a sophisticated algorithm, and though that algorithm isn’t impressive, it at least isn’t repellent)
For me, I decided I had to move over (@makoConstruct) when twitter blocked links to rival systems, which included substack. They seem to have made the algorithm demote any tweet with links, which makes it basically useless as a news curation/discovery system.
I also tentatively endorse the underlying protocol. Due to its use of content-addressed datastructures, an atproto server is usually much lighter to run than an activitypub server, it makes nomadic identity/personal data host transfer much easier to implement, and it makes it much more likely that atproto is going to dovetail cleanly with verifiable computing, upon which much more consequential social technologies than microblogging could be built.
For a while I just stuck to that, but eventually it occurred to me that the rules of following mode favor whoever tweets the most, which is a similar social problem as when meetups end up favoring whoever talks the loudest and interrupts the most, and so I came to really prefer bsky’s “Quiet Posters” mode.
That’s still an algorithm, it’s just a very simple one.
Personally, I prefer to have the posts I see be the product of a sophisticated algorithm (ex: there are some people I follow who post a lot, and for those people I would like to only see their best posts) but I want it to be one that is in my interest.
In my understanding of english, when people say algorithm about social media systems, it doesn’t encompass very simple, transparent ones. It would be like calling a rock a spirit.
Hmm. I think the core thing is transparency. So if it cultivates human network intelligence, but that intelligence is opaque to the user, algorithm. Algorithms can have both machine and egregoric components.
Twitter did use an algorithmic timeline before (e.g. tweets you might be interested in, tweets people you followed liked), it was just less algorithmic than the “for you” tab currently. The time when it was completely like the current “following” tab was many years ago.
This still included other algorithmically determined tweets—from what your followers had liked and later more generally “recommended” tweets. These are no longer present in the following tab.
I’ve been on twitter since 2013 and have only ever used the OG timeline (a.k.a. chronological, a.k.a. “following”, a.k.a. every tweet from the people you follow and no others). I think there were periods where the OG timeline was (annoyingly) pretty hard to find, and there were periods where you would be (infuriatingly) auto-switched out of the OG timeline every now and then (weekly-ish?) and had to manually switch back. The OG timeline also has long had occasional advertisements of course. And you might be right that (in some periods) the OG timeline also included occasional other tweets that shouldn’t be in the OG timeline but were thrown in. IIRC, I thought of those as being in the same general category as advertisements, but just kinda advertisements for using more twitter. I think there was a “see less often” option for those, and I always selected that, and I think that helped maintain the relative purity of my OG timeline.
Markets put bsky exceeding twitter at 44%, 4x higher than mastodon.
My P would be around 80%. I don’t think most people (who use social media much in the first place) are proud to be on twitter. The algorithm has been horrific for a while and bsky at least offers algorithmic choice (but only one feed right now is a sophisticated algorithm, and though that algorithm isn’t impressive, it at least isn’t repellent)
For me, I decided I had to move over (@makoConstruct) when twitter blocked links to rival systems, which included substack. They seem to have made the algorithm demote any tweet with links, which makes it basically useless as a news curation/discovery system.
I also tentatively endorse the underlying protocol. Due to its use of content-addressed datastructures, an atproto server is usually much lighter to run than an activitypub server, it makes nomadic identity/personal data host transfer much easier to implement, and it makes it much more likely that atproto is going to dovetail cleanly with verifiable computing, upon which much more consequential social technologies than microblogging could be built.
After Musk took over, they implemented a mode which doesn’t use an algorithm on the timeline at all. It’s the “following” tab.
For a while I just stuck to that, but eventually it occurred to me that the rules of following mode favor whoever tweets the most, which is a similar social problem as when meetups end up favoring whoever talks the loudest and interrupts the most, and so I came to really prefer bsky’s “Quiet Posters” mode.
That’s still an algorithm, it’s just a very simple one.
Personally, I prefer to have the posts I see be the product of a sophisticated algorithm (ex: there are some people I follow who post a lot, and for those people I would like to only see their best posts) but I want it to be one that is in my interest.
In my understanding of english, when people say algorithm about social media systems, it doesn’t encompass very simple, transparent ones. It would be like calling a rock a spirit.
Maybe we should call those recommenders?
Interesting! Would the original EdgeRank be an algorithm, or is it too simple?
Hmm. I think the core thing is transparency. So if it cultivates human network intelligence, but that intelligence is opaque to the user, algorithm. Algorithms can have both machine and egregoric components.
The following tab doesn’t postdate Musk; it’s been present since before they introduced the algorithmic timeline.
Twitter did use an algorithmic timeline before (e.g. tweets you might be interested in, tweets people you followed liked), it was just less algorithmic than the “for you” tab currently. The time when it was completely like the current “following” tab was many years ago.
Yes, I know; the following tab was already present at that time, is what I meant to communicate.
I’m pretty sure there were no tabs at all before the acquisition.
Technically it was a dropdown rather than a tab per se, but the option to switch to the chronological timeline has been present since 2018: https://www.theverge.com/2018/12/18/18145089/twitter-latest-tweets-toggle-ranked-feed-timeline-algorithm. (IIRC there were third-party extensions to switch back even before then, however).
This still included other algorithmically determined tweets—from what your followers had liked and later more generally “recommended” tweets. These are no longer present in the following tab.
I’ve been on twitter since 2013 and have only ever used the OG timeline (a.k.a. chronological, a.k.a. “following”, a.k.a. every tweet from the people you follow and no others). I think there were periods where the OG timeline was (annoyingly) pretty hard to find, and there were periods where you would be (infuriatingly) auto-switched out of the OG timeline every now and then (weekly-ish?) and had to manually switch back. The OG timeline also has long had occasional advertisements of course. And you might be right that (in some periods) the OG timeline also included occasional other tweets that shouldn’t be in the OG timeline but were thrown in. IIRC, I thought of those as being in the same general category as advertisements, but just kinda advertisements for using more twitter. I think there was a “see less often” option for those, and I always selected that, and I think that helped maintain the relative purity of my OG timeline.