Gary Marcus

Rank 20 of 47
|
Score 48
1/26/2025, 1:16:27 AM
X
In reply to:
Dan
@KettlebellDan
·
147d
@GaryMarcus @MattPainte I can share a white paper if you like but essentially it’s the model for in-network posts served up to a user based on the likelihood that it would be relevant to them. You aren’t directly “punished” but because historical interaction values are decayed over time for obvious…
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
147d
@KettlebellDan @MattPainte what does a “real graph” mean — and why would you punish someone for taking a break?
Dan
@KettlebellDan
·
147d
@GaryMarcus @MattPainte One factor to consider is that when you reduced your usage on the app for a bit you likely hurt your real graph in the logistic regression model with users that followed you
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
147d
@MattPainte @KettlebellDan and maybe some people no longer see me at all; there would be no way for me to tell.
Matt
@MattPainte
·
147d
@GaryMarcus I see this post but I've been seeing far fewer of your posts then I used to
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
147d
Now 95% sure I have been shadowbanned, too many tweets with lots of likes and engagement and RTs simply aren’t getting that many views, maybe 10% of what they used to.

So much for free speech around here.

The statement is part of a conversation about social media reach and potential shadowbanning, which touches on public discourse regarding platform algorithms and free speech.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not cause harm and is a personal reflection on social media reach.
  2. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement does not engage in personal attacks and maintains a focus on the issue of reach and platform algorithms.
  3. Principle 7:
    I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.
    The statement indirectly addresses free speech by discussing perceived limitations on reach, but does not provide a substantive argument or evidence. [-1]