Comment by @joonatan • Hey
Having spent a couple of years trying to figure out any sort of viable Lens algo (ours or 3rd party), I’m not very optimistic that 99% of users would be ab
Comments
- This is great feedback, so I am going to try to go over where I agree, disagree, and need help to see if there's a potential solution.
"Having spent a couple of years trying to figure out any sort of viable Lens algo (ours or 3rd party), I’m not very optimistic that 99% of users would be able (not to mention willing) to calibrate a custom algo that actually improves their experience."
I really agree with this. I don't think that a lot of users will knowingly create or like their own algorithm - however, I think the ability to generate and custody ones own surfing algorithm is still a valuable ability whether its adopted by every user or not. Additionally, I think that custom to app based algorithm curation is more of a spectrum rather then an either/or, so let's say a user comes to phaver with a social graph. Phaver could ask for preferences and then tweak the algorithm according to its own algorithm on top of the preferences. This is more what I envision by "calibration."
"I’m therefore a lot more a proponent of an ”algo marketplace” and allowing users to choose between transparent 3rd party algos once we have some good enough ones."
I completely agree - I think 3rd party algorithm curation will be very meta, but I also think any user should be able to design and export an algorithm on chain. Think of governments censoring news, but journalists are able to export feeds to citizens.
"Technically there could be some standard for those parameters but I’d expect that to restrict the format too much and not get too widely adopted."
I agree, but the same could be said for Lens Protocol itself. Applications that allow users to import and export algorithms should dominate over ones that don't unless that application has an extreme advantage imo. I don't think that doesn't mean its not functionality that shouldn't be available especially because what if its needed or done by a competitor, ext. I certainly don't see any downside risk from implementing it.
"For Phaver specifically, since we have content from Lens, Phaver and Farcaster mixed into one supergraph, any algos we adopt can’t be Lens-specific so that’s another limitation."
This is definitely above my pay grade, but all I would say is that imo, the endgame is everyone on phaver having a lens profile and using that. I don't think we will see a world with multiple social graph protocols - its an all or none world to me. That being said I definitely sympathize with why apps integrate both protocols in the meantime. I guess the question really is what input data for the supergraph do you need the algorithm token to mimic or house in the mean time. I do understand that importing is probably much more feasible to get done then exporting in this example. I also do think there's a certain point when you are looking at application specific trade offs rather then protocol relevant trade offs. Sorta like censorship - except for here lets say tiktok doesn't want a proprietary algorithm exported. But overall, I do think that ownership and self-custody of user centric algorithms can be implemented and done well with good/seamless UX and is an important part of the pie for apps and users. I will edit the backwards compatibility part on github when I get the chance. Curious on any solutions you could think of (mostly bc idk how you generate your supergraph haha).
- I’m gonna put this in notes and get back to you to see how this could work esp on phaver . One quick question, what from Lens is used for the supergraph? Is it just follow graphs/ like history/ rep score, ext? Basically, what data are you pulling from lens that any on chain algorithm would have to provide?
- This in interesting, imma think about this for a bit, then get back to you. There’s a lot of great points I haven’t thought about yet in here.