Because it provides a different perspective, figuratively. I think that might also be a reason why HFR movies feel weird for some people, it's very much a comfort zone.
People looking at data often ignore that every user uses a specific subset of the total subset of features or content.
Just as a simplistic example, user set A wants content `x` and `y`, user set B wants content `y` and `z` - data shows that `y` is popular, but by removing `x` or `z` they make those users very reluctant to continue using the service.
I've seen it multiple times with services I use where only the common set is kept and then people start loathing and leaving the service.
If things like Star Trek were canceled season three, it'd never have reached such masses, it was a niche show at start but now there's even actual new generations watching The Next Generation. Long term decisions are hard, but if you take no risks, it's guaranteed nothing will pay off. Accidentally killing a next cult series or movie would be a huge misfortune.
It goes into the same category as criticizing C's memory safety. The errors do say a lot about the tech being prone of misuse, and that's not really a good thing.
With the music playlists I just really really want a button that would mark certain songs as "I like them, but not so often". Disliking makes certain artists and styles fall totally out of my playlists, not disliking makes it repeat like a broken record.
You need to counter-train the algorithm to get useful results out of it basically. Keep ignoring those videos, mark them as boring, refresh the page, etc. do content discovery the old-timey way.
Just recently they started playing the exact same ads but sometimes they have a few syllables messed up. I think I now have first-hand experience in being gaslit, it really makes you doubt your sanity if you heard the "same" ad but "wrong".
I don't think it's the ratios like 1/20 to 1/40 that are the cause, it's children in those classes. There was a HN thread about magnet/gifted schools and how they made a night-and-day difference in terms of quality of education and wellbeing for quite a few kids, just because there weren't disruptive/mean people there. That's what I've personally witnessed as well. I don't think homeschooling has any hope of beating a well-educated teacher in a good learning environment, that's what we should strive for really.
Somewhat. If the gifted kids can socialize among themselves then that certainly is more beneficial. In theory it'd be nice to only interact with people like oneself but I don't see that happening, learning how to interact with others is definitely not useless but indeed depends on the amount. Not sure I'd measure usefulness with some productivity metrics, that success = productive kid at that point in time, social skills are hard to measure like that.
The sage-on-a-stage also comes with socializing both during and after lessons, that can't be replaced with computers. If anything, I think it'd cause a lot more sadness than the current system.
I have exactly the same experience as the previous commenters, I was also basically rescued into a (learning-)conducive environment and I'm seriously thankful for that. The alternative would've very likely been awful because I've seen on a good friend of mine what happens when there isn't an opportunity to get into a "magnet school". It basically caused clinical depression and such a strong distaste for school that it made completing even high school basically impossible.