Reddit’s empire is founded on a flawed algorithm

Posted on December 9, 2013

Reddit has a bug in their code. This bug is currently present in their production platform, and has been for years. It affects one of the most important algorithms in the entire site, the “Hot” ranking algorithm for link popularity. It has real, demonstrable negative effects. It has been reported to Reddit’s technical team several times and never fixed.

The Bug

Reddit needs to determine which articles are “hot” right now. Newer material is better than older material. Material with many positive votes is better than material with few votes, and both are better than material with mostly negative votes. This is pretty straightforward to calculate. One determines numeric values representing these two measures, and multiplies by some constants to determine exactly how much priority each measure gets .

The devil is in the details, or in this case, the implementation.

seconds = date - 1134028003

The time-dependent variable, named seconds , is based on a UNIX timestamp. It’s a bright way to do it: time is forever counting up, so every new submission receives a slightly higher score from the time variable than every submission that came before it.

s = score(ups, downs) order = log10( max ( abs (s), 1 )) if s > 0 : sign = 1 elif s < 0 : sign = - 1 else : sign = 0

The vote-dependent half of the equation has two parts. The sign variable simply designates if the total vote sentiment is positive or negative. If the material received more positive votes than negative votes, sign is 1 ; if more negative votes, sign is -1 . The other variable, order , is the log₁₀ of the absolute value of the vote score.

The actual problem stems, as so many problems do, from the transposition of two characters.

return round (order + sign * seconds / 45000 , 7 )

Here we have our final score calculation. seconds is a large positive number. order will always be positive – it uses the absolute value, so a submission scored -389 will have the same value for order as a submission scored +389. We need to use sign to adjust order so that net-negative submissions are penalized accordingly. But this code multiplies sign and seconds , not sign and order .

On net-positive submissions, this has no effect. sign is 1 , so order and seconds are added together and everything is good.

What happens on a net-negative submission? sign is -1 , so the very large seconds value becomes negative. Then a positive order is added to that. This has several surprising results!

Imagine two submissions, submitted 5 seconds apart. Each receives two downvotes. seconds is larger for the newer submission, but because of a negative sign , the newer submission is actually rated lower than the older submission.

Imagine two more submissions, submitted at exactly the same time. One receives 10 downvotes, the other 5 downvotes. seconds is the same for both, sign is -1 for both, but order is higher for the -10 submission. So it actually ranks higher than the -5 submission, even though people hate it twice as much.

Now imagine one submission made a year ago, and another submission made just now. The year-old submission received 2 upvotes, and today’s submission received two downvotes. This is a small difference – perhaps today’s submission got off to a bad start and will rebound shortly with several upvotes. But under this implementation , today’s submission now has a negative hotness score and will rate lower than the submission from last year.

Consequences

This is not a hypothetical problem. Curious to see if the code in Reddit’s public repository was what they had running in production, I found a recent post in a fairly inactive subreddit and downvoted it, bringing its total vote score negative. Sure enough, that post not only dropped off the first page (a first page which contained month-old submissions), but it was effectively banished from the “Hot” ranking entirely. I felt bad and removed my downvote, but that post never really recovered .

Indeed, by manipulating the query string, you can find a strange purgatory where damned submissions slowly rot, alone in the darkness . Here is a collection of unfortunate articles from the iPhone subreddit:

These posts are sad, alone, and afraid. And notably, they are sorted oldest first, just as I predicted.

This banishment flaw opens a door for more intentional gaming of the system as well. Imagine a hypothetical subreddit, /r/BirdPics, devoted to pictures of birds . An attacker despises puffins, and wants to keep all pictures of puffins off the front page. This attacker can downvote every picture of puffins, but will be outgunned by the other users who like and upvote puffin pics. On average, 350 people are watching the front page of this subreddit at any one time, so that’s a lot of upvotes to contend with.

Instead, our attacker will watch the new submissions very carefully, and the moment a puffin pic is submitted, immediately downvote it. If the attacker gets to the picture first, it will go negative and be utterly exiled, never again touching the front page. The only thing the attacker needs to worry about are the people watching the “New” ranking, which ignores votes. Our hypothetical subreddit only averages 10 people on the New page, so our attacker can defeat them simply by maintaining 10 sock puppet accounts, instead of the ~300 that would be needed to defeat the front page users. Just like that, our attacker has scrubbed the subreddit of all puffin pics, and the world is a poorer place for it.

Remediation

I wasn’t the first person to notice this error. Jonathan Rochkind covered it in his well-written post on the subject. He was told by a Reddit developer that he was “just incorrect” and that the algorithm as it exists is “not wrong”.

I submitted a pull request fixing the bug, and was informed by a different Reddit developer that “it’s that way by design”. I do not understand, nor have received a satisfactory explanation of, in what sense this nonsensical behavior would be “by design”. But it is clear that Reddit is not interested in fixing this, and this behavior will probably persist for many more years.

Denouement

Programmers tend to nurture a definition of justice that revolves around rule conformance. It’s why many of us find worldly realms like relationships or politics so intractable, and why many of us were drawn to computer science in the first place. In computation, everything is strictly deterministic. If something happens that doesn’t make sense, it can only be because our understanding of the system is incomplete . To be Right, capital-R Right, is a system that is fully understood and executes precisely as expected.

When we hold this type of worldview, intentional propagation of a bug seems unjust. Myself and the other developer who pressed this issue seem to have a more complete understanding of the algorithm than the Reddit employees who responded to us. We’re certainly correct about the surprising and counterintuitive behavior of the unpatched algorithm. We are Right and Reddit is Wrong. And Reddit has a wildly popular site, a tremendous userbase, and tons of cash flowing in. All built on a foundation with an obviously Wrong component.

What’s the moral here? Maybe it’s that an insufficiently tested system becomes an insufficiently understood system, and eventually a system that is defended with rationales like “it just works, stop asking questions”. Or not. Maybe the moral is that the perfect is the enemy of the good, that worse is better , that splitting hairs can distract us from the haircut . Maybe it’s that a good technical implementation is a distant second to a good product, and that hard data should always yield to a positive experience.

Maybe there is no moral. Reddit screwed up. It could have hurt them, but it didn’t, and probably won’t. They are wrong but they are not Wrong because there is no such thing as capital-W Wrong. Moral codes are ideas that we construct, and there is no god of determinism that will one day smite Reddit for their crime of being bad at math. The world is a flawed place, has always been a flawed place, will always be a flawed place.