Well.. technically no. You still have all your options, i.e. access to all the site content. It isn't suppressing any of that and so your options are, in fact, still there. This algorithm is designed to present some posts over others based on your reading/ commenting habits.

In truth, this isn't particularly different from what's already a facet of GTV's post-system ever since I joined. There's "Home" and then there's "More" at the bottom. Under "More" is more news. Some very interesting articles are posted and stay under "More" simply because they don't get all that much attention. In some cases posts become "latest news" again even when they're significantly older than those more recently posted. This leads some users into fits of paranoia and believing their own posts are being actively and deliberately suppressed based on the content, which simply isn't the case.

You're absolutely right. I don't want "filtered posts" that become more and more myopic and narrowed down as time goes on, which means I may never become aware of new developments in other areas of interest, and some posts can be suppressed altogether in the name of "algorithms". I want to see ALL posts.

Furthermore, there are times I just ask someone to go the Gloria.TV website to see one of the latest articles in particular on the front page, just like any news site where everyone sees the same articles newly posted. Now everyone's page will be completely different and they won't be able to find the article I tell them about.

This does not make sense. It's a mistake.

@Ultraviolet If I may speak for… It’s not that it’s antichristian in the literal sense. An algorithm is neither pro, nor anti, correct? It’s more like its not human. It’s like going to a tailor and the tailor tells you what you like. He may come to know you after repeated visits. He may learn what you like. But he’ll never know what you’re thinking, what you’d rather be thinking, where your going, etc. IOW, all the things that make us human rather than a machine, or a product (as in we are the product).

It’s rationalism (or machine learning) directing the intellect. Predictability, repeatability, sale-ability. It works for a time; then it becomes a prison. The website has flourished in a world of ideas largely because they bring ideas into the daylight. People are attracted to it, to the light. To be herded, which is really what the algorithm is doing, serves a marketing agenda at the expense of free will.

It's not all bad mind you. Like Capitalism, like the family dog, when it's governed by Catholic teaching or clear family hierarchy, it tends to be your best friend. When not, your worst nightmare.

"Hey, we have some admins impersonating users here..." @Mater Ter Admirabilis Really? That's contrary to my experience with them. GTV's administration is highly secretive. They shun publicity and keep a low profile, which is not the sort of behavior one sees from a user with 10.3k comments. ;-)

@Bruceph Mildur It's not for me to decide if yuu speak for Mater Ter Admirabilis. That's their decision and they haven't approved or disapproved of you representing them. If, as you say, "It’s not that it’s antichristian in the literal sense." then you've just expressly repudiated the latter's claim. I personally didn't go that far and simply asked them to show proof. :D

"An algorithm is neither pro, nor anti, correct?"

That depends. If you mean in the sense of an algorithim having sentience and conscious opinions, or even moral guilt, you're correct. However, an algorithm's purpose and the intent of its designers might be very much pro or anti. The algorithm might not have a conscience but it reflects that of its designers/ programmers.

For example if, hypothetically, a GTV admin doesn't like Polish GTV users, then contructs an algorithm to detect IP addresses from Poland and automatically ban them, the algorithm most definitely IS anti-Polish. even if it isn't sentient or even conscious.

"It’s more like its not human. It’s like going to a tailor and the tailor tells you what you like."

Not so. A tailor is a human with human prejudices and opinions. An algorithm is not. It's only programming; it doesn't possess as you said, "all the things that make us human."

"It works for a time; then it becomes a prison."

Such algorithms are easily circumvented. It's why the outrage and concern over this software is entirely out of proportion. I suspect, like so much hysteria, it's driven by ignorance and fear. For me, it's going to be little more than a new source of entertainment, learning how it reasons and what the design philosophy is behind it.

"To be herded, which is really what the algorithm is doing, serves a marketing agenda at the expense of free will."

You see any site ads here on GTV? Me neither. :) If you're worried about marketing here on GTV, I've got some bad news. There are already plenty of users shilling their own sites, their own blogs, their own products, but they do so in the guise of "news" posts. GTV's admins are content, for now, to allow their site to be shamelessly used in such a manner and it isn't my place to contradict them. Again, still a non-issue.

@Ultraviolet: I see you’ve a mind for detail. I like that. As a friend once noted of our conversations: you just riff, and I’ll keep the beat. So please, keep the beat. And permit me to ramble. [no musician am I]

Though my comment about ‘the literal sense’ can be thought of as repudiation, I’d rather think in terms of course correction, or finer definition, in terms of the conversation, however ineptly I’ve expressed myself. The idea of repudiation is not my intent. I think @Mater Ter Admirabilis is onto something. Maybe the terms are too strong, maybe the argument is not sound in its expression, (throw in hysteria, ignorance and fear - possibly being no more than “the smell of the sheep”. Did I just quote someone? I can’t believe I just did that. Maybe cuz it's 2021.) I think you may agree that the world in which we live is so manipulated, so contrived, that the reaction to an introduction of algorithms, if over the top, is understandable, and perhaps in this light warranted. Like court judges, people it would seem, tend to lean to ‘the left’. Entropy at work?
The antidote follows in the Mind of Christ, the source of life. As you point out, the purpose of the algorithm designer, in this case expressed as a user experience enhancement, drives its function. But there are and can be unintended consequences, no? They can be found in the mathematical language itself. Or the English language. I recently came across this observation while viewing an ‘out-takes’ video youtu.be/e6YbCO9g-K0>. The part where Alan Weston came on got my attention because though I would not have known it then, the Marxist undertones in his thought are quite clear to me now. John Kenneth Galbraith followed, and his speech, more precisely the way he speaks, sparked my interest. He seemed so disciplined, so logical, thoughtful, and so thorough, but simultaneously so limited by the very cognitive discipline he had mastered (again I would not have noticed this in the past). And his pronouncements, directives and writings of his time have proven largely erroneous, at least according to some people. A Harvard degree is no guarantor of veracity. Think Doctor Timothy Leary!

As Catholics we understand the mind, as beautiful as it is, can be and in fact is, a most venomous enemy. It Genesis 3:1a states: “Now the serpent was more subtle than any of the beasts of the earth which the Lord God had made.” Did he lie? No, but he deceived… A derivative of this can be found in Juan Donosco Cortez, 140 years ago noting: “Discussion is the title under which Death travels when he seeks to avoid recognition and goes incognito” *. So how things shape a discussion have consequences, some good intentions turn out otherwise. Time will tell I suppose. Things need trying and testing, tailoring, improving, feedback, etc.
You’re spot on wrt allowing the site to be ‘shameless used’. I too prefer this be throttled back a bit.
*Essays on Catholicism, Liberalism, and Socialism

At the risk of being nit-picky, the "music" metaphor isn't any Better than the "tailor" similie.

"Though my comment about ‘the literal sense’ can be thought of as repudiation, I’d rather think in terms of course correction, or finer definition, in terms of the conversation, however ineptly I’ve expressed myself."

You didn't express yourself ineptly at all. You were quite clear and you undeniably did repudiate Mater Ter Admirabilis' comment.

They claimed that If GTV is copying the "same bad behavior" from "other anti-Christian sites". You, speaking on their behalf stated, "It’s not that it’s antichristian in the literal sense." Since they were speaking in the literal sense when making the accusation and you then said GTV's behavior is not antichristian in the literal sense, yes, that's repudiating the original statement.

It can be throught of that way, because it is that way, regardless of your intent or how you prefer to think of it or your currently stated intent. It isn't a "course correction" and their comment isn't a vehicle, either. ;-)

"I think @Mater Ter Admirabilis is onto something. Maybe the terms are too strong, maybe the argument is not sound in its expression..."

What they're onto is being incorrect, for precisely the reasons you stated in your second sentence. ;-)

"I think you may agree that the world in which we live is so manipulated, so contrived, that the reaction to an introduction of algorithms, if over the top, is understandable, and perhaps in this light warranted.

An "over the top" reaction is, in simple terms, an over-reaction. Almost without exception, such are based on hysteria. There's nothing warranted about doing so, least of all on a religiously and ideologically conservative site like this one.

"Like court judges, people it would seem, tend to lean to ‘the left’." "

The direction where people seem to lean has little if any bearing on how they lean on GTV, which is anywhere but to the left. ;-)

"The antidote follows in the Mind of Christ, the source of life."

I'm not seeing any Gospel quotes here, amigo, so I'd suggest abstaining from presuming to claim what Christ thinks of web-site algorithms or what antidote He would suggest or even if He thinks one is necessary. ;-)

"But there are and can be unintended consequences, no?"

There can be, yes. But until they are demonstrated, let us proceed from known facts and not speculation masquerading as fact.

Out of charity, I'm not going to list all the logical fallacies present in the "YouTube" example and the quote from Genesis. In short, both are non-sequiturs. An internet debate between two men is not an algorithm. Likewise, an algorithm is not the Devil in the Garden of Eden.

I prefer using logic to shape a discussion, much to the fury and frustration of those who favor rhetorical arm-waving and hyperbolic hand-wringing. That isn't, I should mention, a criticism of you personally, though it definitely applies to the person you're trying to defend.