I ditched the algorithm for RSS

I will say something that’s potentially controversial, but — the problem with current times is the abundance of content. RSS worked for me in 2000s, because more or less, there were less interesting content/people writing things for public. Most decent things would get into people’s feeds, and generally everyone was happy. I can’t really see it being feasible nowadays, unless something (reads: algo) filters things that I’m definitely not interested in. Which, obviously, creates a whole different problem of siloed echo chambers. It becomes even a bigger problem when you try to move the conversations to the real world, because your friends wouldn’t have read the same things as your tailored algo recommended to you.

There’s also assumed-financial-incentives, which ruins most of blogs/content for me. That’s probably my cynicism, and maybe I just grew up, but every time I see any write up, my first question is how this person gets financial benefits from it. I just never thought that far until 2015.

Sorry for ranting, and obviously I have no solution to this problem.

> I will say something that’s potentially controversial, but — the problem with current times is the abundance of content.

FWIW, there's never not been an overabundance of content in the timeframe occupied by RSS, and RSS was created to allow one to aggregate the information one was specifically interested in in a standards-based way.

It sounds like you prefer "For You" algorithms, which is fine to the extent that you trust the filterer, and very convenient for a "sit back" consumption experience. The way that I enjoy some of that experience using RSS is by aggregating thoughtful aggregators like Kottke, MetaFilter, the Waxy.org linkblog, etc.