3 ms·

It doesn't seem radically different from any of thousands of news aggregator type web sites, including HN. It allows you to tailor your aggregation, and create

It doesn't seem radically different from any of thousands of news aggregator type web sites, including HN. It allows you to tailor your aggregation, and create you own aggregation of topics if there isn't another aggregator out there. Are you into kumquats, ancient Mesopotamia, and The Buzzcocks? You're not going to find a web aggregator for that. But you can put together several RSS feeds into your own aggregation.

jfengel 4y ago
Couldn't I just subscribe to kumquats, ancient Mesopotamia, and The Buzzcocks groups on Facebook? Yeah, I know "the algorithm" means that I'd miss some things and have other things injected into my feed, but it doesn't sound like the total content is radically different. I understand the idea of wanting to feel more control by seeing precisely and exactly the groups you asked for, but I feel like it's not really a radical change in terms of content.
- vanilla_nut 4y ago
  Facebook shoves content I don't care about in my face, and frequently hides content from pages and people that I do care about (who don'y pay Zuck's troll toll or play visibility optimization games like emphasizing useless Story content). My RSS reader (FreshRSS, self-hosted, and NetNewsWire on macOS/iOS) shows me all posts from all feeds I've chosen to subscribe to. Nothing more, nothing less. No ads, no murky VC cloud funding -- I self host on my own raspberry pi -- and no privacy concerns. Social media is kind of like a flaky RSS feed with comments from people I don't know or care about that sometimes doesn't show me content I DO want to see but also constantly shows me ads, tries to manipulate me into spending more time browsing, and hoovers up as much data as humanly possible. Oh, and it changes the UI every 6-8 months in seemingly random UX a/b tests in the name of "optimization." And it radicalizes my older relatives politically. That seems like a pretty shitty RSS feed to me.
- musictubes 4y ago
  Most of the sites that I follow do not have a presence on Facebook. Plus it's nice to have the info sent to you unencumbered by the nonsense/ads/privacy concerns on social media sites.
- lexoj 4y ago
  Then you need to check Facebook everyday to not miss stuff, whereas with RSS you have full control WHEN you consume your feeds.
- reaperducer 4y ago
  Couldn't I just subscribe to kumquats, ancient Mesopotamia, and The Buzzcocks groups on Facebook? Sure, you could. I can't. I'm locked out of Facebook. And in spite of sending a photo of my government ID into Facebook's customer service black hole, nothing has changed. RSS gives me the freedom to aggregate information without relying on some faceless tech company to decide when I can have it, and when I should be cut off.

jfengel 4y ago

Couldn't I just subscribe to kumquats, ancient Mesopotamia, and The Buzzcocks groups on Facebook? Yeah, I know "the algorithm" means that I'd miss some things and have other things injected into my feed, but it doesn't sound like the total content is radically different. I understand the idea of wanting to feel more control by seeing precisely and exactly the groups you asked for, but I feel like it's not really a radical change in terms of content.

vanilla_nut 4y ago
Facebook shoves content I don't care about in my face, and frequently hides content from pages and people that I do care about (who don'y pay Zuck's troll toll or play visibility optimization games like emphasizing useless Story content). My RSS reader (FreshRSS, self-hosted, and NetNewsWire on macOS/iOS) shows me all posts from all feeds I've chosen to subscribe to. Nothing more, nothing less. No ads, no murky VC cloud funding -- I self host on my own raspberry pi -- and no privacy concerns. Social media is kind of like a flaky RSS feed with comments from people I don't know or care about that sometimes doesn't show me content I DO want to see but also constantly shows me ads, tries to manipulate me into spending more time browsing, and hoovers up as much data as humanly possible. Oh, and it changes the UI every 6-8 months in seemingly random UX a/b tests in the name of "optimization." And it radicalizes my older relatives politically. That seems like a pretty shitty RSS feed to me.
musictubes 4y ago
Most of the sites that I follow do not have a presence on Facebook. Plus it's nice to have the info sent to you unencumbered by the nonsense/ads/privacy concerns on social media sites.
lexoj 4y ago
Then you need to check Facebook everyday to not miss stuff, whereas with RSS you have full control WHEN you consume your feeds.
reaperducer 4y ago
Couldn't I just subscribe to kumquats, ancient Mesopotamia, and The Buzzcocks groups on Facebook? Sure, you could. I can't. I'm locked out of Facebook. And in spite of sending a photo of my government ID into Facebook's customer service black hole, nothing has changed. RSS gives me the freedom to aggregate information without relying on some faceless tech company to decide when I can have it, and when I should be cut off.