Ironically, it felt to me like the post deified algorithms itself, but this is the main takeaway:

We should neither mystify, nor deify these systems, because it makes us forget that we have built them ourselves and infused them with meaning.

An “algorithm” is nothing more than a set of instructions to follow to complete some kind of task. For example (and closely related), a sorting algorithm might attempt to sort a list by randomizing the list, then checking if it’s sorted and repeating if not (bogosort).

Lemmy uses an algorithm to sort posts by “most recent”, for example, and I think that having a “most recent” sorting option is noncontroversial.

Where algorithmic feeds become problematic, in my opinion, is when they start becoming invasive or manipulative. This is also usually when they become personalized. Lemmy, Reddit (within a subreddit), and other kinds of forums usually do not have personalized feeds, and the sorting algorithms for “hot” are usually noncontroversial (maybe there’s debate about effectiveness, but none usually about harm). Platforms like FB, Twitter, TikTok, Instagram, YT, etc all have personalized feeds that they use personal data to generate. They also are the most controversial, and usually what is referred to as “algorithmic” feeds.

These personalized feeds are not magic. They often include ML black boxes in them, but training a model isn’t sorcery, nor are any of the other components to these algorithms. Like the article mentioned, they are written by people, and can be understood (for the most part), updated, and removed by people. There is no reason a personalized feed is required to invade your privacy or manipulate you. The only reason they do is because these companies are incentivized to do so to maximize how much ad revenue they make off you by keeping you engaged for longer.