• auzy1@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    24 days ago

    I’ve been saying this for a while.

    Of course, our right wing nut jobs won’t vote for it because they need rage bait to get votes (and normal people don’t post rage bait).

    If this passes, Australia will turn sane again

      • auzy1@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        24 days ago

        The greens I think want it to be opt in.

        However, it’s better to pass something and improve it later

        At the moment, it’s a shit show

        • cinoreus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          23 days ago

          Honestly I’ve been in thinking over it and solution might be algorithms that are both open source and cryptographically random. Open source ofc, people should know exactly how their algorithms work. Cryptographically random precisely because a fully open source algorithm might be easy to game. And this should be made compulsory

    • biggerbogboy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      24 days ago

      Interesting how a vast majority of the right wingers I know, including my dad, don’t research anything at all, and only rely on algorithms to give them right wing rage bait.

      My dad for example said to me that “all these foreign exchange students are getting $50k grants for entering the country on MY taxes” after hearing it on TikTok, then I did the most minor research and found that it’s only for one of the states (I think either QLD or WA, can’t remember which though). I rebutted his claim by stating that it’s state legislation and has no basis in taking other state taxes nor much federal tax, and he gave me a long winded explanation basically just to say that I don’t know what I’m talking about.

      Apparently getting force fed slop on TikTok and instagram reels makes you a prolific researcher, while actually researching makes you a bum or something.

      • auzy1@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        24 days ago

        AI makes you a researcher these days.

        Every dumbfuck who never finished school and has no training is delighted it can make them seem smart.

        I’ve literally had arguments with customers who have told me the “facts” based on my own code logs and explain API’s to me and what they do, in products I’ve been maintaining for years.

        The biggest problem is that there is no incentive for AI to say they’re wrong

  • mysteryhumpf@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    24 days ago

    This will have zero impact on the power of tech companies. Most people will just choose the algorithm, it’s just better. The only way to actually have impact is to allow people to know how their feed works and to change the algorithm.

  • pelespirit@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    24 days ago

    Now, if there were a site that we could design our own algorithms, that would be gold. Just want to see your friends? Cool, press that button. Just want to shop for your next adventure? Cool, press that button. Looking for fun things to do over the weekend? Cool, push that button. I want to buy stuff, I just want to see everything available and not have it shoved down my throat.

    • searabbit@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      24 days ago

      The easiest way this could work would be allowing you to group your subscriptions manually or automatically tagging them into preset categories (which would still use AI technically). It’s not really feasible to create an endless number of shitty algorithms that probably won’t give you exactly what you want.

      • pelespirit@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        24 days ago

        It’s what they had on reddit or even your bookmarks. You just tag what category they are and then get those categories or browse theirs.

  • belluck@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    22 days ago

    Don’t pretty much all Social Media have a chronological „Following“ feed already? Methinks they’re just going to argue that switching to that feed is „turning off“ the „algorithm“, no?

    • JohnEdwa@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      22 days ago

      Yes, though this law specifically requires that users can “having their default feed … opt out of algorithmically ​recommended content and instead see posts only from the friends and creators they ⁠choose to follow.”.

      Basically all platforms inject other posts in your feed somewhere either as “recommendations” or just paid ads, and very few default to your subscriptions when you open an app.

  • Solrac@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    23 days ago

    I mean, this is pretty good in theory, in practice, we can just move more people to the fediverse

  • WolvenSpectre@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    24 days ago

    Banning Social Media for Teens and THEN going and regulating how the social media companies work their algorithms.

    That is like driving on a flat tire for a week and then saying “We should do something about fixing the flat tire” except you are the ones who flattened your tire on purpose in the first place.

    Absolute MORONS!!!

      • WolvenSpectre@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        24 days ago

        OK, but this is shutting the stable doors after the horses got out kind of better, not “we needed this earlier and are getting it after some things went wrong” better.

  • ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    24 days ago

    Am I the only one who thinks big tech won’t do jack shit other than nod and smile and install a user button that doesn’t actually change anything at all?

    They are so NOT going to turn this off. This – the ability to manipulate users by controlling exactly what they see – is the sole reason they are in business. It gets them ad revenue, data to resell, and massive, uncontrollable political power.

    And they’re just going to let a user turn that highly individualized control off and turn themselves into a less monetizable, more ad immune user one by one because some govt told them to? The same governments that have been telling them not to do this or that for decades now?

    Lol, pull the other one.

    • Funkt4st1c@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      24 days ago

      Tbf they already do that. Google’s had a button to turn off ad personalization that’s never worked since like, 2014 or something

      • Richard@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        23 days ago

        It DOES work, they don’t show ads based on personalized data. What it’s not garanteed is that are not processing or selling your data on the back anyway.

      • capital5@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        23 days ago

        Ad personalization is hard to verify because it’s all happening on the backend. What you see in a feed is much more visible, so maybe that will make it harder to work around. I haven’t read much about how the legislation works and how it defines algorithms, but if it’s something like, “only show me people I’ve subscribed to”, then it would be pretty easy to verify whether they are showing that or not.

        But in general, I agree. Big tech companies always find a way to work around this legislation. Enforcement is the issue, not the laws themselves.

        • JohnEdwa@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          22 days ago

          I find it easy (when I’m not blocking literally every ad) because they are usually so fucking dumb - do you constantly get bombed by ads about stuff you’ve recently researched and purchased? If yes, personalization is on.

    • MisterFrog@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      22 days ago

      This is the Labor party bringing it in, so you can bet the legislation will just-barely-sort-of do what it says on the tin.

      That’s what you get from centre-right governments…

    • Funkt4st1c@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      24 days ago

      I wish people were more open to simply not using products they dont like. Its inconveniencing, sure, but if you fundamentally disagree with the platform youre on, just get off. Maybe also get off, while youre at it

  • searabbit@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    24 days ago

    PSA: on youtube, you can turn off the algorithm by turning off watch history, so you will only see your subscriptions page, but also related videos under the current video you’re on. I spend less time there now, and enjoy the content I do watch much more.

    • tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      24 days ago

      If you’ve still got cookies on, the related videos are based in your algo. If you open a new private window and watch a few videos your front page will update to reflect what you’ve seen.

  • Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    23 days ago

    Algorithm: a specific step-by-step procedure for solving a problem or accomplishing some end

    Software is full of algorithms.

    I know there is also the recent meaning where “algorithm” stands for recommender systems and algorithmic curation, but I expect lawmakers to be a little more precise in their wording.

    • LavaPlanet@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      23 days ago

      They can’t, if they do they’re calling out the social media sites for purposely targeting addictive algorithms and then this bandaid fix will be noticed for the bandaid fix it is. Most people don’t know social media uses specifically designed to be addictive algorithms. What happens if everyone knows that. So they flatten out the language.

    • Brimstone@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      22 days ago

      They want to make the Feed without algorithms so bad that nobody will use it.

      Social media companies want regulation to keep out competition while allowing them to keep the ads and algorithm flowing as is today as much as possible

    • Funkt4st1c@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      24 days ago

      Easy: get off of it.

      If your family is that important and refuses to move: call them occasionally.

      Every second you spend on it is another cent given to meta