This topic hasn't come up much, but there is an important case that could have significant impact on how the web currently works. Gordon Campbell covers it in Scoop. I don't have the same hand-wringing the-sky-is-falling reaction to this. In fact I can envision many positive effects should the plaintiffs win. https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL2302/S00034/on-how-the-us-supreme-court-could-ruin-the-internet.htm
Regarding this, I'm aware of how precious the tech industry can be over US's Section 230. But given this case is questioning the role of automated heuristic recommendations, I'm not actually opposed to it.
Nuance is needed (there's no solid lines here), & sure heuristic recommendation engines have helped me find some stuff I like. But you know what helps me much more? Asking all of you!
Search/discovery online is broken & actively harmful. Maybe this can kick some innovation?
The core of the issue that I feel the US Supreme Court should consider in this case is one of culpability. My understanding is the BIG Tech are arguing that they should not be held responsible for the results that come from the hueristics of their search and other algorithms. I think this smells. Like one saying that they are not responsible for the bite their dog gives someone. Just because it is an algorithm should not remove responsibility.