Lemmy sorts by new, top and comment count, all of which are easily checkable, and I imagine hot and active are too. These aren’t algorithms because their methods aren’t hidden.
Right, I know they do. But “easily checkable” wasn’t our criteria before, this is a different criteria.
Is the criteria just that any algorithm that is transparent is okay? If there was a recommendation system that used your data, but the way they used it was open source, would that be “not an algorithm”? Because that’s also an option, but it’s a different option from this thread’s previous proposal that it be followers only or whatever.
I’m not really advocating for any particular choice here, I’m just saying that if they’re going to make a law around picking which algorithms are okay and which aren’t, they are going to need to figure out where those lines are, and I think that’s going to be harder than the buzzword makes it seem.
Lemmy sorts by new, top and comment count, all of which are easily checkable, and I imagine hot and active are too. These aren’t algorithms because their methods aren’t hidden.
Right, I know they do. But “easily checkable” wasn’t our criteria before, this is a different criteria.
Is the criteria just that any algorithm that is transparent is okay? If there was a recommendation system that used your data, but the way they used it was open source, would that be “not an algorithm”? Because that’s also an option, but it’s a different option from this thread’s previous proposal that it be followers only or whatever.
I’m not really advocating for any particular choice here, I’m just saying that if they’re going to make a law around picking which algorithms are okay and which aren’t, they are going to need to figure out where those lines are, and I think that’s going to be harder than the buzzword makes it seem.