Re: Netnews: The Origin Story

D <nospam@example.net> wrote:

 
On Wed, 6 Nov 2024, Rich wrote:
 

D <nospam@example.net> wrote:

>
On Wed, 6 Nov 2024, Rich wrote:
>

D <nospam@example.net> wrote:

This is the truth!  As a thought experiment I sometimes think
about how I would be able to handle usenet if it had 10x the nr
of posts, and I don't think I would.

>
Been there, seen that....  Circa 1995 (I forget which groups now)
the text posting volume was so great in the few groups I was
following that it was not possible to keep up.  I was always
behind, and falling further behind each day.  Eventually the fall
behind problem reached a point where I decided to just drop out. 
So I disappeared for a good ten years or so.  Of course, when I
did return again, Usenet was a shadow of its former self as far as
text posting rates go.
>

It would have to be either a laser focus on a very small nr of
groups, or aggressive filtering of the subject lines.

>
One did have to do both, and even so, the volume was impossible to
keep up with if the group was at all active.

>
This is an interesting problem. How is it solved in modern social media?

>
If by "modern social media" you mean the likes of FB and its ilk,
presumably by having "the algorithm" showing you stuff, and then you
just doom scroll through the algorithm driven feed.  And if stuff
does not get put on your feed, you are unaware of its existance.
>

 
Ah, so probably just setting some keywords in my client and filter based
on those. Not a very satisfactory solution.

>
Except with "modern social media" you (the user) don't get to "just
set[ting] some keywords" for the "algorithm".  The "algorithm" does it
all for you by magic.  Which, unfortunately, leaves you at the mercy of
the allmighty "algorithm" as to what you see, and provides a great
opportunity for the "algorithm" to bias your world view into whatever
its creators want your world view to be by selective showing or
omission of various posts to your feed.