Charles Paul Freund | March 24, 2005
Disappointed by the movie or music recommendations you've been getting from human critics? Then maybe it's finally time to plug into the ever-improving (ostensibly) world of "recommender applications." Canadian writer Sarah Lazarovic explains that such "web-based applications seek to recommend music not through descriptive reviews, but through affinities calculated by a computer algorithm. Websites like Movielens.org and Filmaffinity.com endeavour to tell you what you will like by having you tell them what you already like."
There's ever more media out there to choose from, notes Lazarovic. "Defining by association," she writes, "involves abandoning micro-judgments (e.g. one critic's opinion, your brother's testimonial) for the world of global opinion -- computer-produced taste groups based on mutual affinities. We've long been in the habit of defining things in the context of other things -- so and so writes like so and so, someone sings like someone else. Sites like Musicplasma.com, Music-map.com [and the others] just take it to the next level, dispensing with the articles and adjectives."
Maybe you can never have too few adjectives, but I admit that I've gotten used to the articles.
Thanks to: ArtsJournal
Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.
The autorecommenders on Amazon and Netflix consistently recommend things to me which I dislike or in which I have no interest. YMMV.
I occasionally get an email from Amazon recommending something I was just thinking of buying. Because I've spent so many years living far from decent music retailers, I've bought enough crap from Amazon to make their recommendations program work fairly well.
Must be a slow day at the CBC arts desk. Amazon and other major
book and music retailers have been doing this for at least six?
seven? years. The old Firefly, before Microsoft bought it to get
the technology and shut down the site, did an especially good job
once you rated a couple hundred artists and albums. That was about
ten years ago.
Then as now, these systems only start doing a good job once you've
indicated your ratings of at least a hundred or so items in a given
medium, and in my experience, it doesn't cross media well. If you
haven't rated a bunch of movies, all the data in the world on your
music tastes isn't going to result in very good movie picks, at
least at this point.
The problem with these applications is that they all implicitly
assume that your preferences are objective, or at least consisten.
Whether you like or hate a movie is highly subjective, and I don't
mean just that one person might love a movie that you hate, I mean
that the you that exists at this moment might have hated the very
movie you loved last night.
Whether you like a movie or not is at least as dependent upon your
mood going in as it is upon the intrinsic qualities of the
film.
I occasionally get an email from Amazon recommending
something I was just thinking of buying.
In some ways, the Amazon recommendations are pretty spot on -- they
often recommend things I already bought years ago from somewhere
else.
There seems to be one bug in the way Amazon recommendations work,
though. Many of the recommendations are based on stuff I bought
someone else for a Christmas or birthday present, and have no
interest in for myself.
Maybe you can never have too few adjectives, but I admit
that I've gotten used to the articles.
Not me! I think articles are pain in ass! I never use articles when
I am doing stand-up routine.
The autorecommenders on Amazon and Netflix consistently
recommend things to me which I dislike or in which I have no
interest. YMMV.
At least your TiVo
doesn't think you're gay.
ABC,
They generally don't function on the assumption that your tastes
are objective, but rather on the assumption that your subjective
tastes are similar to those of people who like the same things you
do.
If all the data points are similarly subjective, you can usually
build a pretty coherent recommendation list, assuming any given
user supplies it with enough points of reference.
I get a lot of uninteresting stuff from Amazon's recommendations --
but they also recommended Richard K. Morgan to me. Best.
Recommendation. Ever.
"There seems to be one bug in the way Amazon recommendations
work, though. Many of the recommendations are based on stuff I
bought someone else for a Christmas or birthday present, and have
no interest in for myself."
You can fix that by going into your Amazon.com recommendations
page, clicking on the link that says "[X] Items You Own" (where [X]
is a number) and then de-selecting items you've bought for someone
else.
I've had a pretty consistently good experience with Amazon's
reccomendations for books. Far less so than with reccomendations
for music (which I don't buy much of) or movies (which I buy a lot
of, but according to what most people would consider to be
extraordinarily strange selection criteria). I freely concede that
the failures of the system for me in music and movies are because
of insufficient (in the former case) or misleading (in the latter
case) data.
The difference between Amazon and a system like this is that
Amazon's process is much more user-friendly. I buy things I want
(which is what I go to the site for) and it automatically gathers
data and attempts to perceive my taste...and if it guesses wrong,
the worst case scenario is that I only get to do everything I
actually intended to do at Amazon (that is, buy the books I went
there to buy). I don't have to spend hours of my life specifically
feeding it data about myself and hoping that the outcome of its
analysis proves useful enough to justify that time.
Even if your TiVO thinks you're gay, it'll still record the shows
you tell it to. What do these sites offer to users whose tastes
they aren't good at interpreting?
There's an application we have at my office that works somewhat
like this, but not for movies. (I'd say more, but we have a
confidentiality agreement.) We never use it. It was programmed into
our computer system and never completed.
People, on the whole, prefer humans to machines. That's why we all
hold down (or repeatedly press) the zero button when we need to
talk to a customer service representative. That's why we still have
human beings reading news, weather, traffic, and sports instead of
some digitized voice -- even though a digitized voice is possible,
and even if the human is just a taped loop repeating the same stuff
over and over. We'd still rather hear the human.
It makes me curious whether any of you ever get annoyed by these online recommendation systems, telling the user what he is "expected" to like based on past behavior (strong intention to persuade/manipulate). What do you think?
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245