Skip to main content

Why Too Many RSS Feeds May Not Be A Good Thing

Rick Borup notes that he's reaching the point of information overload, even with RSS.

What is needed to make it easier to read 1000 RSS feeds a day? It would be useful if the News reader learned about the types of items that you DID read and then suggested key ones to you. (I can envision an interface similar to that of the Automatic Playlists in Windows Media player - feeds I read at night, feeds I read during the day, random pick, etc)

This might make it a little easier - it would also be useful if the NewsReader aggregates the feeds themselves - so that if 10 sites all referenced the same main story - it only appeared as one news item, instead of ten (but with 10 different "story comments")

Hey Greg and Nick - you guys listening?

fiat volpes: Deja View, or Why Too Many RSS Feeds May Not Be A Good Thing

Comments

Anonymous said…
Yes, we're listening :) I agree that RSS readers will need to do more to help with information overload. At the same time, we also need to make it easier for those new to RSS to get started.
August 16, 2005 at 7:26 AM
Andrew MacNeill said…
Glad to hear it.

I agree - it's tough to make it easier for newbies. (especially when everyone uses different file extensions to identify their RSS feed)

I just had a colleague try to upgrade iTunes so they could listen to podcasts and it had to be reinstalled twice.

Hopefully IE7 won't take over the initiatives that you guys are planning.
August 16, 2005 at 7:42 AM
Anonymous said…
What a wonderful invention it is, this thing we call the Internet!
October 1, 2005 at 6:07 PM
Anonymous said…
Come and check it out if you get the time 8-)
October 1, 2005 at 9:20 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Elevating Project Specifications with Three Insightful ChatGPT Prompts

For developers and testers, ChatGPT, the freely accessible tool from OpenAI, is game-changing. If you want to learn a new programming language, ask for samples or have it convert your existing code. This can be done in Visual Studio Code (using GitHub CoPilot) or directly in the ChatGPT app or web site.  If you’re a tester, ChatGPT can write a test spec or actual test code (if you use Jest or Cypress) based on existing code, copied and pasted into the input area. But ChatGPT can be of huge value for analysts (whether system or business) who need to validate their needs. There’s often a disconnect between developers and analysts. Analysts complain that developers don’t build what they asked for or ask too many questions. Developers complain that analysts haven’t thought of obvious things. In these situations, ChatGPT can be a great intermediary. At its worst, it forces you to think about and then discount obvious issues. At best, it clarifies the needs into documented requirements. ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Respect

Respect is something humans give to each other through personal connection. It’s the bond that forms when we recognize something—or someone—as significant, relatable, or worthy of care. This connection doesn’t have to be limited to people. There was an  article  recently that described the differing attitudes towards AI tools such as ChatGPT and Google Gemini (formerly Bard). Some people treat them like a standard search while others form a sort of personal relationship — being courteous, saying “please” and “thank you”. Occasionally, people share extra details unrelated to their question, like, ‘I’m going to a wedding. What flower goes well with a tuxedo?’ Does an AI “care” how you respond to it? Of course not — it reflects the patterns it’s trained on. Yet our interaction shapes how these tools evolve, and that influence is something we should take seriously. Most of us have all expressed frustration when an AI “hallucinates”. Real or not, the larger issue is that we have hi...
Post a Comment
Read more

When A Machine Starts To Care

“Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” Arthur C. Clarke (1962)  I first used that quote when I was starting out in the tech industry. Back then, it was a way to illustrate just how fast and powerful computers had become. Querying large datasets in seconds felt magical—at least to those who didn’t build them.  Today, we’re facing something even more extraordinary. Large Language Models (LLMs) can now carry on conversations that approach human-level fluency. Clarke’s quote applies again. And just as importantly, many researchers argue that LLMs meet—or at least brush up against—the criteria of the Turing Test.  We tend to criticize LLMs for their “hallucinations,” their sometimes-confident inaccuracies. But let’s be honest: we also complain when our friends misremember facts or recount things inaccurately. This doesn’t excuse LLMs—it simply highlights that the behavior isn’t entirely alien. In some ways, it mirrors our own cognitive limits....
Post a Comment
Read more