That's an odd use of "traditional". Maybe I come from an older tradition, but my solution is to forget passive discovery. Instead of hoping someone else's algorithm will identify things for you, actively search for it yourself.
That's an odd use of "traditional". Maybe I come from an older tradition, but my solution is to forget passive discovery. Instead of hoping someone else's algorithm will identify things for you, actively search for it yourself.
But.
How can I possibly sift through the MOUNTAINS of garbage on the internet to find good stuff? Who has that time?
I would actually love to have a good algorithm that would scour all of the content of the web and recommend just the things I would like, but all the algorithms that exist seem bad at doing that.
Should they be? What in YouTube's business model involves providing accurate recommendations?
(FWIW I've been loving the nearly-completely blank new YT home page. Tune in, turn off YT history, see the lame reccos drop out)
Maybe that's too cynical, and accurate recommendations are difficult. I've observed I can do much better by searching for content on my own, so I do.
Your matching problem is: what are the videos I would most like to watch
Youtube's matching problem is: what are the most lucrative videos which the modal user will still watch
Consider the limiting case: if people were willing to watch ads without any content in between, YT would happily serve them exactly that.
If you don't know what you're looking for, wait and do something creative until you do have something to search out.