> Rss doesn't take interactivity away from you. It delegates it to Wherre ever you choose to visit.
It does take it away. The current status quo has (1) a feed of content and (2) two-way interaction between poster and commenter in the same place. Switching to just RSS inherently takes away (2)
> Social media didn't give them a real choice.
Social media did give them a choice. RSS and blogging is older than social media and people chose to stop visiting individual blogs in favour of social media.
> I guess people forgot that anonymous commenting is indeed a thing.
People didn't but I doubt most people running blogs want to deal with anonymous comments. You already get so much spam and unhinged content when you require a signup.
> As the article discussed, part of the ATS stack used Rss.
Part of it sure, but it also involved other layers to compensate for the parts that are lacking in RSS that users have come to expect.
How is one extra click taking away Twitter? This is like saying older apps (taken down because centralized services didn't like this) took away interactivity because they werre managing multiple feeds for you. That's all RSS is. Did Reddit/HN or any other link aggregator take away news sites? That's all RSS is.
And using other non RSS parts is fine again, RSS isn't a social media. It's a way to help aggregate content. You keep claiming to know how RSS works but demonstrate that you feel it's some competitor instead of a commodity.
And yes, the powers that be "won" becsuse they were at war with the idea of people not having all their time dedicated to their feed. Users "chose". to be manipulated becsuse their choices were taken down, weakened, or taken hostage. Similar to how users "chose" to use the official reddit app when they removed 90% of third party ones.
> Did Reddit/HN or any other link aggregator take away news sites? That's all RSS is.
Both of those have thriving comment sections and would be completely irreverent without them. Further, it's a known problem for both of those sites that people will not read the article and instead riff of the title. I'd wager the final 50% of every article could be removed and it wouldn't significantly change the comment sections here.
> Similar to how users "chose" to use the official reddit app when they removed 90% of third party ones.
Yes they did, they chose to use those apps and chose to continue using Reddit in general despite its shitty behaviour. The alternatives just aren't good enough.
>Both of those have thriving comment sections and would be completely irreverent without them.
Yes. And you can use RSS feed to do the same thing, either liking to a reddit comment section or actually reading the article and not bothering. Same structure except you're not limited to Reddit's servers.
>they chose to use those apps and chose to continue using Reddit in general despite its shitty behaviour
They lost choice and decided using the worst choice was better than moving off of Reddit. I guess if enshiftification is "choice", They did indeed choose. I chose to walk away.
And it's why I hate centralizafion. Because it reduces you down to two choices per owner. Their way or the highway. If you instead managed an RSS feed of a dozen websites and Reddit removed its API, your daily feed may be smaller but your browsing habits would not change. I can still interact with the other 11 sites as much as I want and not need extra time trying to figure out what's out there.
I’m not disagreeing with you about the issues of centralization. I too walked away from Reddit and paid that cost.
My point is that (a) many people have not despite the cess pit Reddit and other sites have become, and (b) RSS is inherently incapable of replacing the experience because it’s a pull only mechanism.
Mastadon based itself on ActivityPub, not RSS.
We’ll see if the long term forces that consolidated and entities Twitter and it’s ilk will do the same to Mastadon instances. Cause I’m still not convinced that the general public is willing to or ready to run their own servers
> Social media did give them a choice. RSS and blogging is older than social media and people chose to stop visiting individual blogs in favour of social media.
Can we say that people choose to get addicted to addictive stuff?
It does take it away. The current status quo has (1) a feed of content and (2) two-way interaction between poster and commenter in the same place. Switching to just RSS inherently takes away (2)
> Social media didn't give them a real choice.
Social media did give them a choice. RSS and blogging is older than social media and people chose to stop visiting individual blogs in favour of social media.
> I guess people forgot that anonymous commenting is indeed a thing.
People didn't but I doubt most people running blogs want to deal with anonymous comments. You already get so much spam and unhinged content when you require a signup.
> As the article discussed, part of the ATS stack used Rss.
Part of it sure, but it also involved other layers to compensate for the parts that are lacking in RSS that users have come to expect.