Cause and effect seem reversed here. The feed aggregator is the most easily replaceable part of RSS, so if RSS were actually popular, it shouldn't have even mattered that Google killed Reader or those Chrome features. The harder part is getting RSS content, and YouTube is one big hold-out supporting that.
How Google helped destroy adoption of RSS feeds (2023)
231–240 of 265 posts
Re: How Google helped destroy adoption of RSS feeds (2023)
#232Google’s obviously fake excuse for killing their RSS reader (declining usage) was especially maddening at the time because they were pushing Google+ - which _nobody_ used.
Probably Google's biggest failure ever was to recognize they've already had a social network: Gmail.
Thank goodness
Re: How Google helped destroy adoption of RSS feeds (2023)
#233Google’s obviously fake excuse for killing their RSS reader (declining usage) was especially maddening at the time because they were pushing Google+ - which _nobody_ used.
Well, everybody _did_ use Google+ but nobody _wanted to_. I remember constantly finding myself redirected to it and them doing shady things like automatically connecting you with everyone in your gmail contact list. Also, if memory serves, they chose an avatar for me using Picasa or photos in my gmail or something and it was a photo of me without a shirt on.
They shoved it hard into YouTube. The comment system there is still broken to this day.
Re: How Google helped destroy adoption of RSS feeds (2023)
#234I think the core issue is that it is hard to sell why you need an RSS, especially for the average user. It would not be uncommon to meet an IT professional who has at best heard the term, but never really tried to delve further. Sadly by the time the average internet dweller hears of RSS, their mind is already so ingrained in the "usual" browsing experience that anything that is out of the ordinary feels instinctivel…
I remember in middle school we had to do a preso on a web technology. I chose RSS. Nobody had heard of it before. After seeing my preso, nobody cared. I stopped using it not long after. Think the problem is people don't care enough to put in the time curating a feed.
Oh also, Podcasts are RSS for audio, but the branding there is so much better that maybe they should've called text RSS "Podcasts" too.
Re: How Google helped destroy adoption of RSS feeds (2023)
#235Earlier quoted context omitted.
What prevents you from using RSS now? Outsourcing your RSS feed to a megacorp sounds like a horrible idea.
Who do you outsource yours to, or do you read with curl?
There have been many RSS aggregators since before Google Reader existed, most of them local
Re: How Google helped destroy adoption of RSS feeds (2023)
#236I don’t understand why many sites with news updates / blogs don’t offer an RSS feed. Are they expecting me to keep visiting the site over and over to see if there is new content? They’re guaranteeing I’ll never visit their site again. Perhaps they’re expecting people to subscribe to social media accounts or via email, but those both cost money to reach users. RSS is free.
I think simply because they are not aware of RSS
Re: How Google helped destroy adoption of RSS feeds (2023)
#237Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "I am feeling lucky" YouTube Music still has this feature and it even uses the die icon, just like always. > you could upload your library to it. You can also do this in YouTube Music. > But they killed it They rebranded the exact same code base with largely the same staff. I don't know why you perceive this to have been a break.
Yeah, but if the songs in your Google Music library weren't on YouTube Music, you just lost them forever. End of story. It was the betrayal that turned me off Google.
Are you talking about uploaded music? All of mine is still available and a lot of it definitely isn't on YouTube. Did you try looking for the uploaded music tab? It can be hard to find
Re: How Google helped destroy adoption of RSS feeds (2023)
#238Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Firefox with uBlock Origin on Linux Same setup and same experience. I've recently joined another company which only provided chrome with no extensions by default. I know the web is filled with ads but I'm shocked again and again when I get a glimpse into what it's like without an adblocker.
There are dozens of us. Maybe one day people will realize how much better Firefox is now and how nicer the web can be with no ads.
Firefox could be doing a great deal more if it had a more imaginative corporate leadership.
Re: How Google helped destroy adoption of RSS feeds (2023)
#239Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ads have destroyed our culture. Just look at the fundamental change YouTube underwent in 2012 when they made all users eligible for monetization. It turned it into junk/infomercial TV.
I don’t disagree with you at all, but it’s not like we didn’t have alternatives. We could’ve just paid for the content, directly subsidising the creators we like.
>We could’ve just paid for the content, directly subsidising the creators we like.
That wasn't an option. And if it had been, they would've rolled out monetization through ads anyway. If you believe otherwise, there's too much we disagree on to sum it up here.
Re: How Google helped destroy adoption of RSS feeds (2023)
#240The Internet in the early 2000s felt a little more special as compared to today, when 99.999 % of content is locked in a handful of walled gardens. I mean sure everything we had then is still possible but let’s be honest everything about the web is fine tuned to deliver ads to our eyeballs, browsers, operating systems and even protocols are being designed with ad delivery in mind. Even the privacy friendly browsers j…
> everything about the web is fine tuned to deliver ads to our eyeballs, browsers, operating systems and even protocols are being designed with ad delivery in mind. I use Firefox with uBlock Origin on Linux, and haven't seen an ad in years. It's not like ads weren't a thing 20 years ago. Pop-up windows were particularly bad. Javascript, in particular, has been constantly abused against the user ever since it was crea…
I use Mullvad Browser, which is Tor Browser -Tor +uBlock Origin.
No you don't need Mullvad VPN to use Mullvad Browser.