Wouldn't want anyone to know

They don't want you knowing what other people think of the video. It's just about what you think of the video. Much easier to have an algorithmically perfect echo chamber if everyone is privately rating things and has no idea what others think about them.

It's all bots anyway

The thumbs up/thumbs down thing was fine too.

I'm pretty sure that 99% of the time 1 and 5 stars options were used, so like/dislike is enough. There isn't much point in including a "I have no strong feelings one way or another" button.

"Oh man, I remember those days when the stars actually meant something! Now they're just trying to push their own agenda on us."

“Amy Schumer isn’t hated by Netflix users. It’s the star system that’s wrong. “

The thing is, people themselves outside of business motives hate negativity.

People regularly get angry at others for bringing up criticisms of everything from foods to their favourite media products.

Even decades ago they'd give them names like negative Nancy, and within social settings the worst people often can win by weaponizing civility to quell legitimate backlash against immoral actions.

I mean, fuck, think about how many stories you've heard of people who have been the victims of sexual assault, who get told by normal people to shut up and whose experiences were diminished because it harshed other peoples mellow?

People suck, and one of the biggest reasons people suck, is they would prefer a harmful peaceful positivity than a tumultuous improvement causing negativity.

I think these companies are hooking into these human flaws in ways that hurt us, and benefit them with information asymmetry.

I don't think we can properly fix these flaws without somehow getting normal people to acknowledge that negativity is not just good, but vitally important.

Every negative feedback I made on Google Playstore got removed. You know what? It was the Dev himself who asked for deleting. Critics aren't allowed one some services.

Hate it. Gave my employer a bad review, 1-2 stars in most categories, and the average was still a 3.7?? I have to adjust my intuition when reading star reviews. Apparently 3.5 is bottom of the barrel.

I know I am not alone here, because Lemmy and all, but holy god damn does that little AI sparkle trigger me more than any other AI term or image.

I've wondered about those. I always assumed they'd just show the down votes by others with the same extension.

Apparently the extensions aren't reliable at all. I saw a video at one point where a guy went over why you cannot trust the extensions and how the numbers are pure fiction, but I forget the exact reasons. I think one example was that the same video would have vastly differnet numbers of down votes depending on the person with the extension. Something something confirmation bias.

For me, it doesn't really matter. I still down vote when I dislike a video. They may not count my vote at all, but I still do it out of stubbornness.

Also, hiding 👎 is completely brain-dead stupid.

I think, it depends on the platform. The reason why many platform don't show them is the constant negativity simply caused by different opinions.

40 people agree with your post, 60 don't agree... I call that pluralism. But showing a -20 for example could motivate the person to delete their post, which leads to echo chambers.

My Lemmy instance does not show any downvotes by the way and I like it. If one disagrees with me, they can leave a comment.

I'm pretty sure it never was different tho I usually use a plugin that shows thumbs-downs. It's basically guessing for new videos so it's not really useful but still

I thought it never left? They just didn't show the number of dislikes to anyone other than the channel who made the video (without plugins, revanced etc).

I'd be surprised if it did anything.

Yeah, that's not definitely not on YouTube, the final 'star score' was effectively indicative only of the ratio of the 5-stars to the 1-stars. The infinitesimal minority that would actually thoughtfully rate 2, 3, or 4 stars made no difference at all.

Next step: you no longer choose a video, it just feeds it to you tiktok style

I do not know why to use Netflix in the first place if you can simply visit free streaming platforms like HDREZKA, watch a few ads and then enjoy your film. Yeah, ads can be annoying sometimes but, at least, all is free, content doesn't get removed simply because of it is no longer watched actively and no forced registration. And they also provide some useful features like the personal lists, collections, different sound records, history of publication for series and even the approximate schedule for the upcoming series which is really useful.

I disagree. There are a lot of videos that I find just "meh". I might not regret watching them, but wouldn't recommend them nor watch again.
Then there is content which I find pretty good/bad but not extremely good or bad. For such cases a more nuanced scale is better.

For other users this might be less informative, since they will be seeing just the average anyway and can therefore only determine general perception; except if the distribution is also made available.

But for a personalized recommendation system I think a nuanced scale can work better.

From a content creators perspective one can also evaluate better whether there is room for improvement and by "how much", in case one is interested in such.

Doesn't this apply only if you are looking at mean average exclusively? There are loads of other metrics you can look at based on scalar ratings.

When Blizzard said "Do You Guys Not Have Phones?" the problem was obviously not the quality of the video presented, it was the topic at hand and made perfect sense to have all the dislikes. It makes no sense to take that away from users.

I mean, was it even supposed to be related to quality? If I dislike the content of a video I'm going to hit dislike even if it's well made.

But yeah, I guess the ratios were usually from brigading.