So the point of the post is "Now the timeline order has changed. It's not a timeline anymore, but it's a filtered and reordered feed. I feel very sad about that

So the point of the post is "Now the timeline order has changed. It's not a timeline anymore, but it's a filtered and reordered feed. I feel very sad about that and I want to explain you why." The why in that is "Now Instagram aims to be the brother of Facebook: a time sucking machine that has to steal the highest amount of my time to maximise the exposure of his ads. Now it’s too hard for me follow what’s happening to my friends, and I can’t do it real-time anymore.". I don't really think it makes much sense to be so sad about this, since the whole reason Instagram did this (according to them) is that people were only seeing 30% of the images on average so it just made sense to try and present the best 30% up front (explained here http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/16/technology/instagram-feed.html?_r=1 http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/16/technology/instagram-feed....). And if like me this guy follows few enough people to keep up with all the photos, then there should be no issue because I can always easily keep up with only the people I am following and see all their output. Maybe it is not real time anymore and it is noticeable to this person, but it still seems to be overstating the case. And how is this change relevant to try to capture most of your time? It seems moreso to be about trying to give the best experience possible, confronting a problem that most people probably friend and follow way too many people to keep up with. Seems reasonable to me... Not to mention it's very dubious to claim the call came from Facebook, and not internally from Instagram following the same direction Facebook and Twitter went over time.