• Druid@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    12 hours ago

    Fortunately, there’s a big difference between Lemmy and Meta social media: no algorithms. Similarly to how reddit worked years ago, you have a page you cater to your needs that displays content based on numeric popularity, not because an algorithm deemed the content to be worth showing. I doubt there’d be much to argue with in court based on that premise alone.

      • justaman123@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 hours ago

        Yeah good question, also it would be nice to have like a disinterested button so I could hide items instead of being shown them over and over again. I do tend to go to my all or local page and sort by top for the last 12 hours to get a better mix

      • A_be_seedy@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 hours ago

        I’d imagine it’s upvotes and time based, which to me sounds like an algorithm. I recognize it as a better and more fair algorithm but idk how it would be argued in court as being different. But I would love to learn with you.

    • kkj@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 hours ago

      There are always algorithms. You literally can’t make software without them. As far as algorithms for choosing which content is displayed, Lemmy still has to have one of those to weight votes vs. age. Is a post that’s +50/-0 from five minutes ago the best to show you, or the one that’s +400/-100 from an hour ago, or the one that’s +1000/-100 from last year?