I do enjoy tiktok, although the longer it exists (and the longer it’s under American control) the more I feel the negative effects of “the algorithm” in that it’s not just building an echo chamber by accident but it’s intentionally showing me or not showing me things for their own gain.

I want an algorithm, but I don’t want an Algorithm ™

I hope piefed takes off because I like it. But still maybe it’s for the best that I use it as an excuse to disconnect completely from social media

Automatic personalized feed curation, imo, would make it better, based on tags added by the author, by the reader, and by automatic classification, which is then weighted against your previous interaction with posts with those tags and explicit user preferences regarding those tags.
In other words, an option for an automatic personalized feed algorithm. But people here (and the devs) are against it because it’s a boogeyman.

That said piefed at least lets multiple tags be added to a post where Lemmy doesn’t, so that’s the minimum bar for something like what I’m describing.

But it’s a chicken and egg problem because the tags aren’t helpful for manual or automatic curation until more people actually use them accurately. So tldr I don’t have a solution.

I mean curation by community is too coarse. Often communities have a mixture of posts I’m interested in and posts that I’m not.

The idea of communities makes sense from a moderation perspective, but I don’t like it from a feed/search perspective.

I don’t like how people talk about The Algorithm™ as though any feed algorithm is inherently a problem and exists to keep people trapped in the app.

I’d love to have an algorithm automatically curated my feed so I don’t have to manually curate it, since the curation tools are so coarse.

Who you’re trying to invite over?
You don’t. That’s established relationship shit (romantic or otherwise).

Oh get over yourself

Short form is cool because it’s like constrained writing.

Tiktok was pretty great while it was just silly videos.\ But it’s not short form anymore so it’s full of political essays and propaganda.

I kinda hope that loops is more like vine than tiktok or vertical YouTube. But it’ll probably be up to the instance to govern video length.

None of those really “feel like” the things they’re replacing. I don’t really even think that should be the goal. They occupy the same space, though, and the infographic would look stupid if it showed all the options in some category, so they just picked a popular proprietary/centralized one, and a popular federated alternative in the same category. In this case discord is a popular chat app, and the most popular federa chat app afaict is matrix.

It’s illegal to hire people or refuse to hire people based on political beliefs or affiliation, so you’re not gonna have companies that only employ Trump supporters or employ no Trump supporters. Politics is considered a protected group wrt employment law in the USA and many countries.

But how would it actually work?
It’s not like it’s difficult to gauge employee sentiment about ICE. If your employees are strongly against it, then you simply don’t enter the competition for ICE contracts, or you choose to not renew the contracts when they expire.

They only have to make an example of a few to discourage the rest.

The only real safety is with the instances hosted and run in locations difficult for American companies to pursue legal action

Yeah, but at the same time it’s kinda good for people to be able to see the kind of shit they’re posting for themselves.

It is propaganda, but it’s not good propaganda, and that’s what the community fact checking thing is meant to counter, imo.

Even if that was true, which it isn’t, a company should reflect the beliefs of its employees and community.

If it’s an official govt agency I think it makes sense for them to be allowed on communications platforms and to be verified, so that people can see what they’re saying and know that it’s an official statement.

Then people can see the post and make their own judgements about it, knowing it’s an official agency statement.
Having twitter style factcheck for blatant misinformation is also important for this, though.

I think that tech companies taking a stand on what their employees and/or users believe in is a reasonable thing.

Idk what the employees of bluesky believe, but I’m fairly familiar with the bay area tech scene and I think that there is a decent chance that the employees would like to take a stand by not providing services to ICE.

That being said, idk if simply allowing them to have an account is providing services. I think it’s probably better to have govt agencies have verified accounts so people know when things are official statements, even if you disagree with the agency.

Im not sure how these stats are collected, I assume that they query each server for its to make the chart, rather than query every server every day and copy the results.

If they’re really copying the results, then you’re absolutely correct that temporary instances outrages would cause those correlated downward blips, but I’m surprised to hear you wouldn’t just be able to query servers to get this data on demand.
But then again if a server went permanently offline you’d lose that data forever. Hmmm

A statistician explain to me why these graphs seem correlated beyond general trend? They both seem to have localized events on the same day, but given their different timescales that doesn’t seem like it should be possible.

I raised the same concern on the other post too, but idk enough about statistics to for sure say something seems fishy.

But they should be offset. Monthly MAU departures shouldn’t reflect in half-year until 5 months later. And half-year departures shouldn’t influence the MAU at all.

The fact that they line up to they day strikes me as very suspicious.
But I’m not a statistician

Right, that’s why I suggest providing both an opinionated option and an opinionated option. Like a “recommended” section and a “full list” section.

Let people without contest and who don’t care to learn the context in advance use an opinionated picker, but don’t withhold from people who want to dig in.

But it turns out I misunderstood the example that was given - those instances aren’t shown because they simply aren’t piefed instances.

Ah I misunderstood your example, I thought you were saying instances were intentionally excluded from the picker rather than “instances that don’t support this platform don’t appear”.

I’m not going to opine on what constitutes a “real” leftist apart from saying that left/right dichotomy really doesn’t describe reality well.

https://join-lemmy.org/instances will send you to places like hexbear.net and lemmy.ml, whereas https://piefed.social/auth/instance_chooser literally never will.

Honestly I think this is a problem. I don’t think the instance picker should be so opinionated that it blocks (legal) instances. I want extremist to be directed away from the normie and moderate instances. I prefer to clearly characterize instances and let people pick their own, while also providing opinion for people who don’t care or lack understanding.

Although this is clearly a point of preference, and I can see why some people would prefer the opposite to possibly prevent the radicalization of a moderate.