I really like the core idea here: media used to be a push model, social media turned it into a pull model but they're trying to wrest it back. I always hated the push model of social media, which is why most of the online content I consume is via rss, including Twitter [0].<p>But I never thought of traditional news media media as being a push model. It makes so much intuitive sense when you say it: the reason I read newspapers is, at least in part, I want and trust them to tell me what's happening that's important. That's different than my programming blog subscriptions: I follow them because <i>I've</i> decided what they write is important to me.<p>It's a subtle difference but very impact-full, and seems correct.<p>[0] not sure of they actually have rss feeds but my rss reader supports them
People need to learn to start forming their own opinions and not being so easily influenced by <i>who</i> said <i>what</i> and thinking about the <i>what</i> itself.<p>Lately I've been wondering if maybe people evolved to be sensitive to the <i>who</i> to make it easier for us to be controlled. Said control can be useful at times.
I first used a tool to change the fb feed when they stopped allowing me to sort by chronological order, now my account is deleted and I don't use it at all. They assume you are their cash cow, their captured audience. Prove them wrong. If you doomscroll you're probably bored by it but stuck as their prisoner.<p>I see tiktok as more of flipping through the channel on TV but finding something good randomly, usually but I don't spend much time on it.
Why did I never know about Twitter Lists before? Twitter has been unuseable for me because it just feeds me fucked-up shit from people I don't know even though I disabled all the notification options, just like for the author.<p>Examples: <a href="https://kingcharles.one/wtftwitter.png" rel="nofollow">https://kingcharles.one/wtftwitter.png</a>
This is an inevitable side effect of people's tendencies to over-subscribe to information sources. Once it's normal to try and follow 200+ people on Twitter, you're in need of an algorithm to prioritise content, and from there it's an easy side-step to inserting other content you haven't asked for.<p>Unfortunately even when you don't follow 200 people on Twitter, you're still subject to the same design principles.
Since the article specifically laments the loss of chronologically ordered tweets, it’s worth mentioning here that NewsBlur can not only aggregate RSS feeds but also act as a twitter client and provide said missing functionality.
"The great thing about a paper book is that nobody needs to know what you are reading and when."<p>... then proceeds to post an amazon link to a book
>"So I got to watch hours and hours of incredibly boring TV shows because there was nothing good on"<p>I grew up in USSR where TV was for the most part quite pathetic but I did not really dwell on it. There were always books that I was reading in insane amounts and all those long talks with the friends along with some vodka ;)<p>I am in Canada now. Still do not have TV, still read a lot of books but also do heavy "pulling" from online sources. No so called "social media" though unless HN counts as one.
Just switching from "Home" to "Latest" on Twitter is enough to make it tolerable for me (ok, it also helps to carefully prune the accounts you follow).
For Twitter, you can use the <a href="http://realtwitter.com/" rel="nofollow">http://realtwitter.com/</a> redirect to get to a search that just shows what you subscribed to. Then click “Latest” to sort chronologically.
Clay Shirky talked about time spent online versus time spent watching Giligan's Island tv. i still think of it a lot. but this article did a great job calling attention to how crypto-broadcast modern online experiences often are. thanks.
After reading this blog post, I realized, that after doing exactly the same things for last couple of decades it was not decision of mine... but this guys decision.
This thread is a hilarious example of why most people will always be controlled by someone else. There is exactly 5 words talking about Joe Rogan and half the replies are telling how you shouldn't watch him because he spteads misinformation. Meanwhile there has still been no reckoning for the lies the main stream media invented and repeated to invade Iraq and kill a million people.
> we would get to watch whatever the state television decided we would watch<p>What's a state television? Was Canada occupied by North Korea in some other timeline?