Yep the flaw is assuming that humans would actually select for constructive comments. It’s a case where humans claim that’s what they want, but human actions do not reflect this. We’d eventually build yet another ‘algorithm that picks what immediately appeals to most users’ rather than ‘constructive’. You’d also see the algorithm splinter along ideological lines as people tend to view even constructive comments from ideologies they disagree with unfavorably

They just need to pull shorts out into it’s own app. It’s not very often that I’d want to freely mix short 30 second videos in between longer YouTube content. They’re different use cases.

The only issue with your second point is that it can eventually become a quagmire when you do need to upgrade it.

I work for a very old company who held to that philosophy for many years. And while any individual component could be looked at and seen as running fine, when they did finally decide it was time to upgrade they were faced with needing to upgrade everything simultaneously.

All of the tech was too old, so no current tech had the sort of backwards compatible bridge that helps you move forward. It’s like figuring out how to get your telegram system to also work on your WiFi network, nobody makes any interfaces for that.

Instead of slowly and gradually replacing components over time, they’re faced with a single major overhaul that’s put the entire company at risk because they have to completely shut down for over a month.

Setting up a world in which you are forced to drive and then making incredibly draconian surveillance of your performance of that required task is just cruel. Put this effort into providing me travel options that don’t come with the risk of major injury, death or jail time.

Same kinda logic as people who complain about ads saying that they’d rather pay for the service, instead of ads. The reality is only about 1% ever do pay. I assume it’s similar for clothing, where most people naturally gravitate towards the clothes that look ‘best’, even if they don’t have pockets.

We shouldn’t have to pay for the content we use to train and teach an AI

Wait people think that sounds reasonable?

A big hurdle of AI is the fact that they really can’t ‘learn’, at least not like humans can, where we filter out bad data or go back and correct previous assumptions (not that we do this perfectly). Seems like anyone who’s able to truly figure out how to teach AI without needing super-clean data sets will have basically unlocked something pretty close to the singularity. Which makes me assume that we’re honestly no where close to figuring that out and that sample collapse is much more likely (with possibly the internet as a whole being effectively ruined, same as voice calls have been effectively ruined by rampant spam).

This. I’m happy with these content offerings, but it’s weird to have them all mashed together. It’d be like if Lemmy randomly inserted book chapters in between other posts. It just doesn’t fit with the platform and the use cases are wildly different.