Why Twitter Can't Replace RSS
blog.flowreader.com
Why Twitter Can't Replace RSS
1–10 of 22 posts
Re: Why Twitter Can't Replace RSS
#2He's following the wrong accounts.
Some human journalist is going to occasionally talk about cooking steak instead of technology or journalism.
@melpa_emacs and @TinyToCS never talk about cooking steak.
People and brands on twitter are just spam, not worth following. Focused announcements are surprisingly not bad...
Re: Why Twitter Can't Replace RSS
#3He's following the wrong accounts. Some human journalist is going to occasionally talk about cooking steak instead of technology or journalism. @melpa_emacs and @TinyToCS never talk about cooking steak. People and brands on twitter are just spam, not worth following. Focused announcements are surprisingly not bad...
then you've made the point. one needs to figure out what account to follow by discovering, while rss is usually marked with a predefined topic and way more intuitive for subscribing.
Re: Why Twitter Can't Replace RSS
#4RSS - technology
Twitter - business
Do we really need to discuss anything technical?
Let's say Twitter created a "standard" based on their platform, that could be adopted for free by any organization - then, we might talk about it replacing RSS.
Re: Why Twitter Can't Replace RSS
#5It's how you use Twitter though. Many people forget about Lists. I have a list dedicated to News tweets, such as the BBC, and Reuters, and NY Times...things like that.
Then I have another list for Tech news, and put several different tech websites feeds on it. Then one just for tech journalists (where yes, sometimes you see off-subject tweets, but I _know_ that I may see that sometimes, but you can have a quick interaction on what they say.
I open up a multi-pane client like TweetBot or TweetDeck, then have different lists per pane. I can go through a lot of information in a short amount of time this way.
Re: Why Twitter Can't Replace RSS
#6Twitter can serve as a replacement for a subset of RSS functionality, but even allowing for Twitter to grow that subset, the biggest difference is architectural:
Tweets all run through twitter.com and your ability to retrieve the tweets you want or for the content owners to provide the information they wish depends on Twitter's continued willingness to provide the tools and/or API to do so and to allow you both to keep your accounts. Even assuming they will always want to facilitate this sort of thing and that neither you nor the content owners will do something to get kicked off Twitter, you can be sure that the tools and API will change relatively rapidly over the years ahead.
Meanwhile RSS is (usually) hosted on the content owner's server. The format has been stable for 15+ years at this point. Tools that worked for aggregating and dealing with RSS in 2000 still work today. And only your ISP could potentially stop you from retrieving the content you wish, when you want it, how you want to.
Re: Why Twitter Can't Replace RSS
#7Because twitter is a big setup which is hold together by paste, glue and dirty caches? :o)
Re: Why Twitter Can't Replace RSS
#8"Even when you follow great people, you still have to wade through tweets that have little or nothing to do with news."
Kottke is not a great example of this. He has separate personal and professional accounts. His professional account is essentially just an RSS feed of his blog. Complaining about personal tweets junking up the personal account is silly in this case.
Account he should folllow: https://twitter.com/kottke
Re: Why Twitter Can't Replace RSS
#9They are totally dissonant channels that have some overlap. Expecting Twitter to replace controlled curation is a recipe for noise. The value in RSS is some process or person is curating a defined set of data - the reliability of even organizational Twitter accounts doing that is such that doesn't work.
Further, the buy-in on using Twitter as a transmission medium hasn't really reached the saturation point that RSS did at its peak.
And finally, relying on a third-party - especially one with as dubious a history as Twitter - to maintain your data in foreseeable perpetuity is a bad plan in general. The benefit of RSS was that it was a standard, not a service itself.
Re: Why Twitter Can't Replace RSS
#10When we built twitter we had also hacked up various forms of RSS readers. At the time nobody on the team really thought they were going after rss, news reading, or discovery. But it turns out that trying to solve that problem in parallel to the status update system. Twitter was for a long time very much built upon the RSS stack of technologies. It was a semi-open platform which worked better, unfortunately, than the fully open world of RSS & ATOM.
In the end, now 8 years later, it's clear that twitter DID kill rss as a dominate category of apps & services. We went from being overwhelmed by unread counts on the 'readers' to having flow. I'm not sure it's better, but it did solve the problem of feeling like you needed to keep up.
I think there's still more interesting work to be done in this space. Open social networks (that's what blogs are folks) plus users being able to control visibility of posts and frequency and open api's could do something which could unseat twitter/facebooks.