irelephant [he/him]🍭@lemm.ee to 196@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish · 4 days agorulelemm.eeimagemessage-square18linkfedilinkarrow-up1556arrow-down12
arrow-up1554arrow-down1imagerulelemm.eeirelephant [he/him]🍭@lemm.ee to 196@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish · 4 days agomessage-square18linkfedilink
minus-squareDragonTypeWyvern@midwest.sociallinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·3 days agoWhat else could it be? One person bought both once? That’s also a shitty algorithm.
minus-squareEmperor@reddthat.comlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·3 days agosimplest answer is an database array misalignment, it matched items with the same price instead of another similar attribute. ML for commonly bought stuff is way overkill for a single query and would eat up infra costs.
What else could it be? One person bought both once? That’s also a shitty algorithm.
simplest answer is an database array misalignment, it matched items with the same price instead of another similar attribute.
ML for commonly bought stuff is way overkill for a single query and would eat up infra costs.