Casual Conversation @lemm.eeEnglish · 3 days ago

Do y'all remember "the weird part of YouTube"?

Casual Conversation @lemm.eeEnglish · 3 days ago

I just remembered that back when YouTube generally used to show you actually related videos in the sidebar sooned or later you’d reach this so-called weird part which was basically an assortment of increasingly unhinged recommendations. It’s funny to me that back then that was basically the only time when the algorithm failed to be invisible. But I was also quite young when the weird part of YouTube was a thing so I’d be interested to know if any of you remember specific clips you’ve seen there and any other details I might not have mentioned. The only videos that seem to have left a lasting impression on me were a 9/11 conspiracy documentary and a slideshow about a horrific, likely fake skin disease.

Chat

Jode@midwest.social
link
fedilink
English
arrow-up
9·
3 days ago
I wish there was a Firefox extension that made youtubes sidebar work how it used to.
- tiramichu@lemm.ee
  link
  fedilink
  English
  arrow-up
  3·
  3 days ago
  Algorithmic recommendations happen on the backend, so no chance of that unfortunately

Casual Conversation @lemm.ee

casualconversation@lemm.ee

Create a post

You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !casualconversation@lemm.ee

Share a story, ask a question, or start a conversation about (almost) anything you desire. Maybe you’ll make some friends in the process.

RULES (updated 01/22/25)

Be respectful: no harassment, hate speech, bigotry, and/or trolling. To be concise, disrespect is defined by escalation.
Encourage conversation in your OP. This means including heavily implicative subject matter when you can and also engaging in your thread when possible. You won’t be punished for trying.
Avoid controversial topics (politics or societal debates come to mind, though we are not saying not to talk about anything that resembles these). There’s a guide in the protocol book offered as a mod model that can be used for that; it’s vague until you realize it was made for things like the rule in question. At least four purple answers must apply to a “controversial” message for it to be allowed.
Keep it clean and SFW: No illegal content or anything gross and inappropriate. A rule of thumb is if a recording of a conversation put on another platform would get someone a COPPA violation response, that exact exchange should be avoided when possible.
No solicitation such as ads, promotional content, spam, surveys etc. The chart redirected to above applies to spam material as well, which is one of the reasons its wording is vague, as it applies to a few things. Again, a “spammy” message must be applicable to four purple answers before it’s allowed.
Respect privacy as well as truth: Don’t ask for or share any personal information or slander anyone. A rule of thumb is if something is enough info to go by that it “would be a copyright violation if the info was art” as another group put it, or that it alone can be used to narrow someone down to 150 physical humans (Dunbar’s Number) or less, it’s considered an excess breach of privacy. Slander is defined by intentional utilitarian misguidance at the expense (positive or negative) of a sentient entity. This often links back to or mixes with rule one, which implies, for example, that even something that is true can still amount to what slander is trying to achieve, and that will be looked down upon.

Casual conversation communities:

Related discussion-focused communities

Visibility: Public

This community can be federated to other instances and be posted/commented in by their users.

192 users / day
983 users / week
2.6K users / month
3.03K users / 6 months
2 local subscribers
3.34K subscribers
208 Posts
2.93K Comments
Modlog