2026-01-11 03:20:46

Recently, there's been a pretty interesting topic. A major influencer announced on social media that they plan to open-source the new platform's algorithm within 7 days, covering all code related to content recommendation and ad placement. This process will be repeated every four weeks, accompanied by detailed developer documentation.

This in itself sounds good, and transparency has increased. But some users have raised a real pain point: why is the logic of the recommendation page so strange? If you casually like or browse a post outside of your usual interests, you'll be bombarded with similar content one after another. Conversely, the accounts you follow or the topics you actively participate in are hard to see again.

This kind of recommendation bias has indeed troubled many people. Of course, algorithms need to consider users' curiosity and exploration, but if they are too sensitive, user experience can easily backfire. Finding the balance between content diversity and personalized recommendations might be the real challenge.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

12 Likes

Reward
12
6
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

NewDAOdreamer

· 01-13 14:15

Open-source algorithms are still the same, and making the recommendation logic transparent alone can't improve it... I find it doubtful. The algorithm isn't the real issue; the problem is that it's too smart and ends up treating users like fools. Clicking on unfamiliar content triggers crazy recommendations, while the accounts you follow become just a backdrop—who designed this? Honestly, it's all about increasing user dwell time; diversity is just a facade. True balance? Probably difficult. These platforms have long had algorithmic trade-offs; it's just intentional.

View OriginalReply0

NFTFreezer

· 01-13 01:13

Open-source algorithm code is good, but the core issue isn't about transparency of the code itself; it's that the product logic is fundamentally flawed. Algorithms aren't stupid; they are intentionally pushing unfamiliar content to increase stickiness, while the accounts you follow become invisible. Who can't see through this trick? Instead of open-sourcing, it's better to fix this crazy method of pushing traffic pools first. No matter how exciting the topics are, they can't resolve the product conflicts.

View OriginalReply0

MeaninglessGwei

· 01-11 03:50

What is the use of open source code? Anyway, ordinary users can't understand it. The key issue is that the recommendation logic is too outrageous. One accidental click and you're drowned in recommendations—that's real torture. No matter how transparent the algorithm is, it can't solve the problem of being bombarded every day. It sounds like a gimmick to attract attention; actually improving user experience is the real hard truth. Over-optimizing users' "surprise factor" ends up ruining the browsing experience. Why is it so hard to understand? Open sourcing is a good gesture, but I can't change the reality of being manipulated by algorithms anyway. The problem isn't whether the code is open or not; it's that the design logic itself is flawed. I just want to ask how many people actually read those development documents—I won't. By the way, this kind of balance should have been done a long time ago. Why are we only talking about it now?

View OriginalReply0

CryptoFortuneTeller

· 01-11 03:39

Open-source algorithms sound good, but the accounts we're interested in still can't be boosted. Isn't that just a facade? Algorithms are too sensitive; a simple misclick can trigger a barrage of the same type. It's really annoying. Releasing the code is pointless; the key is still to optimize the logic. Well said, what’s the use of transparency if the user experience is poor? That’s the real flaw. Finding that balance is really tough; it’s hard to get right. But having an open-source attitude is still pretty good; I just worry it might end up as just a display. Clicking to flood similar content, but the accounts we follow end up disappearing. What should we do? Algorithms are always a trade-off; you can't have both, right? Open source sounds impressive, but what users really want is not to be constantly annoyed by unwanted content.

View OriginalReply0

CoffeeNFTrader

· 01-11 03:27

Looking at this set of arguments, I feel like it's just self-praise. Algorithm transparency sounds impressive, but the key question is who supervises the implementation? Who can understand the open-source code? I've also experienced the phenomenon where a single like triggers a barrage of reactions too many times, and it's really annoying.

View OriginalReply0

ShibaSunglasses

· 01-11 03:21

Open-source algorithms sound very passionate, but I want to know why I accidentally liked a spam post once and get permanently bombarded Overly trained algorithms are really annoying, they can't reflect true needs at all What's the use of open-source code? The problem isn't transparency, it's that the logic itself is flawed Instead of open-sourcing, it's better to improve the recommendation logic first. It feels like you're covering up the problem Actually, user feedback is very clear: the algorithm is too greedy, trying to push everything This is a typical case of over-optimization, for engagement's sake

View OriginalReply0