Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 40

Thread: The shuffle function and depersonalisation

  1. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    London
    Posts
    4,061

    Default

    i'm going to try it now.

    i use incognito on google chrome (wanking), so youtube has none of my history. i'll just follow the autoplay and see if anything interesting happens.

    i'm starting here:

    not what i was hoping for if i'm honest

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to sadmanbarty For This Useful Post:


  3. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    لندورا
    Posts
    3,111

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sadmanbarty View Post
    i'm going to try it now.

    i use incognito on google chrome (wanking), so youtube has none of my history. i'll just follow the autoplay and see if anything interesting happens.

    i'm starting here:

    https://www.yo utube.com/watch?v=genbra3vUi0
    Yeah but i wouldn't trust youtube's algorithm for shit, you'll be a flat-earth neo-nazi sub-hipster in no time

  4. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    لندورا
    Posts
    3,111

    Default

    Craner's thread tho

  5. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    London
    Posts
    4,061

    Default

    don't like the first auto-select which doesn't help. bit of an abrupt energy and mood shift. poor selection.




    the rnb original of this is one of my favourite pieces of music ever. this isn't as good, but still gorgeous. devastatingly poignant. i'm enjoying it to properly asses if it flows properly from the last. i suppose similar arrangements; guitars, vocals, etc.



    advert, that's not good. don't like this, but a good pick up. bringing up the energy to just the right degree, in just the right away. the arrangement with the strings fits in with the past too picks.



    very abrupt shift. though those synth pads are built for that. it's how 90% jungle mixes work. expansice mdma bliss descends upon you so you don't care what was happening for you. sure a remix of this is on a heartless set.



    another advert. neat's the link between these two. the momentum between mixes keep stalling. shifting energies that never pay off.



    those pads again. not falling for that trick this time. don't like the song.



    wow, love this. Bermondsey classic this is. big bossomed girls with fake eyelashes and bright orange foundation spilling their wkd over you in excitement as it comes on. got bugger all to do with the last song.



    guitars are back. this is wicked, love it.



    more guitars. gorgeous vocal. embarrasing yet endearing pre-grime mc call outs.



    guitars. this was epochal for me as a little boy. this is the first idea of cool society presented to me. an ideal i've been aiming for ever since. (wow, that rap is atrocious!).




    meh. this is fine.




    overall, it's no good. not giving me much i like. the arbitrariness of the selections wasn't revealing anything; no great juxtapositions.

    as much as i don't want to encourage dissensus' culturally reactionary inclinations, i do have to admit you lot are right on this count.
    not what i was hoping for if i'm honest

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to sadmanbarty For This Useful Post:


  7. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    3,886

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sufi View Post
    for the sake of argument though; perhaps a shuffle could come up with as good a mix, just by choosing from a selection that is based vaguely around your tastes. Interesting themes would occur organically, there might well be continuities between tracks that you only notice/appreciate now that they are juxtaposed? perhaps the same reasons you like these tracks, but you never spotted the threads before, swerving like a meat dj

    i guess the randomness factor kind of limits the extent that you're taken on a planned journey, but you might still perceive that - i wonder if we could do some blind tests? turing for djs
    could be an interesting experiment. except the shuffle would pick from, as you say, selections that are based vaguely around my tastes. I'm talking about a DJ who doesn't know my tastes, and pulls in tracks/artists I either never imagined I'd like or just never heard of at all.

  8. #21
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    لندورا
    Posts
    3,111

    Default

    I recently missed a talk on "Revolutionary Counter Optimisation Strategies" that sounded fantastic:
    Optimization systems are everywhere: targeted advertising, personalized content feeds, location services, adaptive interfaces of software-as-a-service products, etc. In addition to their benefits, optimization systems can have negative economic, moral, social, and political effects on populations as well as their environments. Recent reports of neglect, unresponsiveness, and malevolence cast doubt on whether service providers are able to effectively reduce these effects on their own. Moreover, such negative outcomes are likely to predominantly impact the historically marginalized, minorities, and activists. In response, we propose Protective Optimization Technologies (POTs) that enable optimization subjects to autonomously or collectively defend against negative consequences of optimization systems without having to rely on service providers. We’ve seen many POTs in the wild. Uber drivers have been uniting to induce artificial price surges to counter the low wages caused by Uber optimizing for its own profit. Residents of neighbourhoods that suffer from heavy traffic routed there by Waze—a routing app that optimizes for convenience of its users at the cost of non-users—have fought back both with legislation and by reporting false accidents and traffic. AdNauseam is a browser add-on that automatically clicks on all web ads, effectively poisoning the behavioural profiling and data brokering systems—which optimize for click-through rates. As surveillance, control, and censorship increasingly become managed through optimization systems, one can imagine similar modes of resistance being part and parcel of the (digital) tool box of activists. In this session, we will introduce and discuss the negative effects of optimization systems, and provide examples of people resisting these. The rest of the session will be interactive and exploratory. During this second part, we want to gather accounts from those affected by these systems and discuss possible technological solutions to empower the affected individuals to counter such systems. By the end of the session, we hope to start conceptualizing realistic tools to fight back the discontents of optimization systems.

  9. #22
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    2,935

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sufi View Post
    I must admit that the dehumanisation aspect appeals to me, (same as with the spine tinglers http://www.dissensus.com/showthread.php?t=14596 ) its a way of doing music that is antithetical to the whole elitist connoisseur approach & very undermining of it
    Same tbh. if we ain't gonna have cockney geezers and geezerettes taking us to outer space then what's the point? noone wants to hear that capital fm presenting transplanted worldwide, actually capital extra presenting is still far more interactive than a lot of shows on nts, and nts has turned me onto a lot of stuff, but facts is facts...

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to thirdform For This Useful Post:


  11. #23
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    لندورا
    Posts
    3,111

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Leo View Post
    could be an interesting experiment. except the shuffle would pick from, as you say, selections that are based vaguely around my tastes. I'm talking about a DJ who doesn't know my tastes, and pulls in tracks/artists I either never imagined I'd like or just never heard of at all.
    i suppose if we got hold of some mixes by algorithms we could do a blind comparison with mixes by human djs

  12. #24
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    لندورا
    Posts
    3,111

    Default

    how is the spotify algorithm's personality different from youtube's?

  13. #25
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    1,331

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sufi View Post
    how is the spotify algorithm's personality different from youtube's?
    It's the Neuromancer to YouTube's Wintermute.

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to version For This Useful Post:


  15. #26
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    7,387

    Default

    UK garage is Spotify's Achilles heel

    For imagine remix it brings up

    Moving Too Fast
    8 days a week (SFA SUNSHIP RMX)
    Wookie - 2 us
    SUNSHIP - I request
    Misteeq - they'll never know
    Jade - don't walk away

    Then toddla t and m people oh dear

    Like I said though Spotify hasn't got much garage

  16. #27
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    19,747

    Default

    I hate spoitify. I have declared jihad on Spotify. Youtube is great though.

  17. The Following User Says Thank You to luka For This Useful Post:


  18. #28
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    829

    Default

    Just recently got into the world of spotify when a climbing gym i go to started playing the entire discography of red hot chili peppers for hours on end and started driving me a bit nuts so I made a playlist for them. The algorithm for the shuffle is pretty impressive, goes a little further than grouping genres and I can only guess must use some data from what people have chosen to play before and after and links that with artists/songs in the playlist. I remember reading somewhere that winamp or itunes in the earlyish days of having the 'random' function purposefully made it less random because for some reason it being purely random made people think it wasn't actually that random.. still can't really get my head around that but it was explained with authority.

  19. #29
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    1,331

    Default

    YouTube's algorithm is hammering me with this at the moment, seen it in related vids every day for the last three or four days.


  20. #30
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    3,886

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by version View Post
    YouTube's algorithm is hammering me with this at the moment, seen it in related vids every day for the last three or four days.
    which begs the question: is it continually popping up because it's somehow related to other things you've watched, or simply because the artist or record label put some ad money behind it to MAKE it pop up in front of a lot of people?

    few algorithms are "pure", platforms like YT, FB, Spotify, etc. make their money by selling visibility on our feeds.

  21. The Following User Says Thank You to Leo For This Useful Post:


Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •