4 ms·
RSS maybe not be dead, but it's definitely less alive than it uses to be. The number of "blogs" these days that don't have a feed is absolutely tremendous. The
by norswap 3y ago
RSS maybe not be dead, but it's definitely less alive than it uses to be. The number of "blogs" these days that don't have a feed is absolutely tremendous. The decisions of the browser companies to remove the RSS icons / deemphasize the features is criminal (especially Firefox, who doesn't have the nefarious interest the others have).
- WaitWaitWha 3y agoI venture to say because in RSS various advertising can be very easily filtered out, and temporal & and geo-tracking can be completely eliminated.
- rhn_mk1 3y agoWhat about RSS eliminates tracking? Refreshing the feed is exactly the same HTTP request as fetching a page. With RSS you have to make the request periodically to stay up to date, so I'd say you trade some of that temporal tracking for extra geotracking.
- abdullahkhalids 3y agoMany RSS SaaS providers would request the RSS once from their own server and then serve the cached request to all users subscribed to it. This basically makes it impossible to track the user in any form.
- rhn_mk1 3y agoThis has nothing to do with RSS the protocol. There could just as easily be a SaaS scraping web sites and serving cached contents.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- lolinder 3y agoRSS feeds don't have to provide the whole content of the blog post, so there's no reason why RSS can't be compatible with the various user-hostile techniques prevalent today.
- pphysch 3y agoOTOH, RSS is looking more appealing than ever (in the last decade) with recent changes at Twitter and Reddit.
- exoro 3y agoThose blogs "don't have it" or "don't advertise it"? Seeing that most blogs are Wordpress or another platform that has RSS baked in by default it seems rare to come across one without a feed, even if you have to dig for it a bit.
- P3L 3y agoThat's true, I follow a lot of blogs that I get the RSS with trial and error, mostly typing /feed or /RSS, because they don't offer a straight link anywhere
- packetlost 3y agoYeah, idk what GP is referring to. I can't remember the last time I saw a blog that didn't have an RSS feed. Maybe some exceptions being Medium posts (lol) and corporate blogs where it's posted as part of a larger site, not just someone's personal blog.
- cxr 3y agoMany people who have switched from batteries-included, purpose-built blogging stacks like WordPress to e.g. static site generators (or similar roll-your-own setups) don't have a feed by virtue of the fact that the folks publishing those sites haven't gone out of their way to write the feed template. This is not unlike any other subject where participation comes down to opting in versus opting out. That isn't to say any claims that feeds are almost a thing of the past holds any water. There are almost certainly more feeds now than at any point before. The second derivative is probably a flat line, though, which is what I imagine is behind the perception of deathliness. Feed consumption, on the other hand, is almost certainly down—but only if you exclude podcasts.
- norswap 3y agoOften don't have it, my method this day is to copy the URL of the website to a feedreader. The first few times it didn't pick up a feed, I would inspect the page source, and sure enough, no `link` tag in the head for the feed (nor references to "rss" or "atom" or "feed" anywhere in the page). I don't know what stack they use, but I find this particularly common for company blogs.
- Zambyte 3y ago> especially Firefox, who doesn't have the nefarious interest the others have It's important to note that Firefox is all but legally owned by Google at this point. It exists on Google's dollar so Google can point at it during anti-trust lawsuits.