… we'll even add an extra opening strategy called the Gen Z shake. As soon as a creator starts their video with the phone in their hand, they'll set it down on a surface, causing the viewer's perspective to suddenly shake. This is a very deliberate, planned tactic meant to visually disrupt scrolling patterns and capture attention at the beginning

The Princeton computer science professor Arvind Narayanan instead identifies human-algorithm interactions as a complex system : a nonlinear phenomenon that can't be boiled down to an easily explained model. Instead, the results of these interactions are emergent: They exist only in the context of the greater system.

The human brain really likes simplicity, and algorithms appeal to the brain's subconscious desires, so naturally the algorithm will push stories and categories that feel satisfyingly simple to us. Readily understandable labels and explanations are not only easier to consume; they feel better to consume.

"Categories" are just stories we tell ourselves about how we're similar to or different from each other, and these stories become even simpler through self-Flanderization. It feels so much easier to frame age differences as generational, so we reduce our identities to fit those labels. It's easier to talk about your fashion preferences when you're

In economics and data science, there's an adage called Goodhart's law , which warns that "as soon as a metric becomes a target, it ceases to be a good metric." By optimizing for engagement to keep viewers online, social media platforms turned engagement into a target, eventually resulting in engagement-maximizing content that nobody actually

Ironically, true individuality may come out of a lack of labels and stories, because there's greater freedom of expression with a blank slate. If everybody's the "main character," then nobody is.

Your decisions are now curated for you under the guise of personalization, while in reality they're engineered to make platforms as much money as possible. Your aesthetic preferences, your language, your very identity --all handed down to you by the positive feedback loop of social media algorithms.

There’s also “nip nops” for “nipples”; “peen” for “penis”; and “kermit sewerslide” for “commit suicide.” These terms are all examples of diminutives—words meant to sound smaller, cuter, or less intense. It’s the same reason a little kid might refer to his penis as a “weenie,” “pee-pee,” or “willy.” Diminutives make words sound friendlier, and many

Poe's law has created a dangerous game of hopscotch. We're jumping between irony and reality, but we're not always sure where those lines are. Interpreting words comedically helps the algorithm spread them as memes and trends, but then interpreting them seriously manifests their negative effects.