I liked Facebook early on when the feed was just rapid fire whateever people were posting showed up willy nilly. Then something started controlling what I saw and I couldn't get my family to show up no matter what I did. Blah blah, Twitter did the same thing, started controlling what came across in favor of showing me stuff someone/thing…
I liked Facebook early on when the feed was just rapid fire whateever people were posting showed up willy nilly. Then something started controlling what I saw and I couldn't get my family to show up no matter what I did. Blah blah, Twitter did the same thing, started controlling what came across in favor of showing me stuff someone/thing guessed I would like based on prior viewing, or whatever site paid the most to repeat it a lot, or something. Blah blah. Substack feeds me some things that I do like, but I am missing things I liked that Substack is no longer showing me, although it still shows up in my personal set up where I have specified things I want to see every time I log on/they post soemthing new. I understand the need to optimize somehow to justify fees or information dipping. I would happily pay some money for an utterly unfiltered feed. I guess I might be willing to pay some money/value of some sort for nudges toward my site (once I get it going!) I guess I might be interested to see what your algorithm would feed me as "quality" stuff, but only if you offer some unfiltered raw feed to compare it to...any optimizing search is going to be more and more recursive over time. Sorta like being shown the Mona Lisa as the model of Rennaissance painting and only finding out after much searching that Caravagio's paintings even exist, you know, let alone Artemisia Gentileschi? (Quick, who did "Judith Slaying Holofernes" better? Why do you suppose Artmesia's version is so much bloodier and more heartfelt than Mr. C.s? Which will climb up your 'quality' list first? Why?) Or Jackson Pollock without the counterpoint of Agnes Martin. Or, so many other examples. Change is good, change happens, you guys just be more careful that the ones that came before, please.
I liked Facebook early on when the feed was just rapid fire whateever people were posting showed up willy nilly. Then something started controlling what I saw and I couldn't get my family to show up no matter what I did. Blah blah, Twitter did the same thing, started controlling what came across in favor of showing me stuff someone/thing guessed I would like based on prior viewing, or whatever site paid the most to repeat it a lot, or something. Blah blah. Substack feeds me some things that I do like, but I am missing things I liked that Substack is no longer showing me, although it still shows up in my personal set up where I have specified things I want to see every time I log on/they post soemthing new. I understand the need to optimize somehow to justify fees or information dipping. I would happily pay some money for an utterly unfiltered feed. I guess I might be willing to pay some money/value of some sort for nudges toward my site (once I get it going!) I guess I might be interested to see what your algorithm would feed me as "quality" stuff, but only if you offer some unfiltered raw feed to compare it to...any optimizing search is going to be more and more recursive over time. Sorta like being shown the Mona Lisa as the model of Rennaissance painting and only finding out after much searching that Caravagio's paintings even exist, you know, let alone Artemisia Gentileschi? (Quick, who did "Judith Slaying Holofernes" better? Why do you suppose Artmesia's version is so much bloodier and more heartfelt than Mr. C.s? Which will climb up your 'quality' list first? Why?) Or Jackson Pollock without the counterpoint of Agnes Martin. Or, so many other examples. Change is good, change happens, you guys just be more careful that the ones that came before, please.