Samuel
old following feed sucked, it needed to be done. it’s cool that people who miss the weird way it worked still have the option to keep using the same feed
4 2 29
Bossett
idk that 'sucked' is fair - I wonder about the feel of the app after the change, like is discovery/engagement better/worse/indifferent but I do know that Elon picked a fight with Brazil specifically to make any experiment impossible to run
2 15
Samuel
nah I maintain it sucked, I never enjoyed that method of using the app at all. anyway you’re kinda right wrt experimental conditions lol 😬
3 13
str4d
I realised last night that part of the issue is the conflation of "Following" being "a feed of your follows", vs "Following" being the "homepage" view that everyone from other networks expects to be _the_ feed (being unused to algorithmic choice). I think that creates tension and UX confusion.
2 14
str4d
Within the "feed of your follows" view there's separately deciding what it displays between two possible extremes: 1️⃣ Only posts from people you are following. 2️⃣ Every post from people you are following (with needed context). Old Following was closer to (but not) 2️⃣; new is closer to (but not) 1️⃣.
str4d@str4d.xyz· 30 Aug 2024
Both positive and negative interactions occured through the same mechanism: using "observed interactions of Follows" for graph traversal. I wonder if negative graph traversal happened on much shorter timescales than positive traversal? Feeds can't (easily?) differentiate on rate of observation.
2 2
Samuel
@samuel.fm
turning a bit dial that says “randos” and looking back at the audience etc etc
1 6