Actually, I think I'm going to *not* add blocking capabilities to what I'm building. There are already a lot of things that do that, and mutes with stochastic timeouts provides for forgiveness in a network healing way... ...I think.
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @generativist
It's like incarceration vs habilitation. Blocking doesn't address the feedback loops that bring about certain undesired behaviours or attitudes. It also is often instrumentalized as a symbol or a socially / morally loaded signal. Then again, there are often no alternatives.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @neuropoetic @generativist
I think blocking should be understood as an instrument, and we should understand the plurality of ways it is so: communicative, social, experiential/homeostatic. Is one exerting power over others? Claiming autonomy over how the platform affects me? Signalling who is morally bad?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @neuropoetic @generativist
Not claiming this is accurate or exhaustive, but I do think it is this direction that must be clarified before alternatives can be systematically be explored and tested, especially with regards to how the substitution is reflected in the social/info dynamics and experience.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @neuropoetic @generativist
Forgot to say but I very much commend you on the decision to not add blocking, and pursuing a means to positive network effects such as compassion and healing. Unfortunately that's a scientific inquiry that afaik isn't mature, but I think unexpected places might hold value.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @neuropoetic
Thanks! Although don't give me too much credit yet. I'll *probably* have to add *some* blocking features, but I'm more interested in softly reshaping interactions rather than carving sharp boundaries. (The latter is often needed but plenty of people do that already.)
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @generativist @neuropoetic
Tail https://github.com/jbn/reflock/wiki … if you're interested :)
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @generativist
I think the network percolation effects is super interesting but I also am concerned about the possibility this is playing with fire. There remains the crucial issue of heuristic or poor judgement, and its relationship to morally loaded and exaggerated judgment via mobism
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @neuropoetic
The percolation part is the hardest because automatic is what makes blocklists fail. Either they get too many false positives and people stop using them or they're *explicitly* gamable.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @generativist
Maybe semi automatic with custom settings operating upon the data derived from manually inserted data? Maybe an intermediate format that interfaces btwn user judgment on people/content, the algorithm, and back to users? Maybe the percolation should be on a different network?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
My solution is leaning towards a secondary network that acts as a side channel. Nothing automatic; blocks/mutes presented with evidence. Stochastic periods for reduced gamability.
-
-
Replying to @generativist
I agree that this side channel is the key direction to take, and to focus on the "evidence based algorithm", ideally creating a form of hybrid inference that intelligently can leverage the human and AI/algorithmic resources appropriately. Crucially: What is to be inferred here?
0 replies 1 retweet 1 likeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.