You expressed it perfectly in word which i couldn't. People's hate for algorithm is so weird . Without the algorithm they can never find quality or content they are interest in .
"And to be extra clear, "only show posts from people I follow, in chronological order" is an algorithm."
Apparently people understand different things by "algorithm". I also use the general one and not "algorithm" as a special algorithm that tries to find things I might like based on my past interactions, but mainly tailored to keep my engagement high so I watch more ads"
I would like the possibility of creating and tweaking my own algorithm for my feed.
People here are wilfully ignoring the proper context and meaning of the term as used, even though no one has any trouble understanding what is meant. You even spelt it out perfectly, demonstrating that there isn't any genuine miscommunication happening:
> "algorithm" as a special algorithm that tries to find things I might like based on my past interactions, but mainly tailored to keep my engagement high so I watch more ads".
I do think the internet would be a better place with more openness about those magic black boxes, even if it's just an ability to tweak it yourself without having to do some arcane incantations and rituals (ever gotten your YouTube recommendations completely fucked? How do you unfuck them?).
> I would like the possibility of creating and tweaking my own algorithm for my feed.
This would be really useful, and I think actually should be a right - like data portability. However it doesn't address the issue with the default view not being linear, and hence breaking the utility of such services as a public or community notice board.
> "And to be extra clear, "only show posts from people I follow, in chronological order" is an algorithm."
An algorithm is being used to serve content in that context, but content is not being removed, substituted, inserted or filtered by an algorithm in (the platonic version) of displaying a linear chronological feed. The are the issues which 'the algorithm' has been criticised for in the modern context. If we can acknowledge that's the intended usage here then we can move beyond semantics.
What happened on Facebook in 2012 is that Facebooks product changed from being one that served the affordance 'connecting people', to one that effectively divided people and charged to connect them in more limited ways. The impact of that one change (on FB and mirrored on other services) in creating the sensitisation and polarisation which followed, as well as removing the one major utility of social networks beyond pure entertainment, cannot be overstated.
At the time everyone was complaining that Facebook was just "people posting their lunches" and from that PoV I thought it was a great addition to promote the things people found important in their lives instead of the noise.
Of course that didn't last long.
That's the only kind of algorithm people have been exposed to, so they hate the term.
One of the most important algorithms, google search, has become crap. Social media algorithms have become crap.
Average people hate “the algorithm” because it was a trusted friend(ly tool) ands it has become crap and betrayed them!
If we, technologists, want people to love and use algorithms, we have a duty to avoid making them become horrible or useless for people.