There’s a lot to think about here regarding AI and the dubious ethics that its usage engenders, but admittedly I couldn’t help but think about the “aura” of the web as it pertains to something like RSS. RSS is a convenience, and one that I generally support, but couldn’t it be argued that it stifles the “aura” of the web as well? That the compartmentalization and homogenization into your RSS reader of choice subtracts something from the experience.
Generally speaking, I find myself annoyed whenever someone’s RSS feed doesn’t include full text, but instead forces me to visit their site for each item. In some cases, there’s a summary (“Read More”), in others (like James’) there’s just an image/snapshot of the actual post with a link. This seems counter to the feeling that I mentioned in my first set of thoughts above. I suppose I haven’t fully landed anywhere on this topic just yet. Does contextualization really benefit all that much by the addition of an author’s selected fonts and colors? Is it the arrangement or text? Proximity to other bits of the author? I imagine there isn’t an absolute answer here, and I’m just rambling
I usually click through to the original site from my RSS reader. Not always, but usually. IF there is advertising on the site, however, I’m done with it.
I don’t use any RSS readers, but I imagine my perspective on that would depend on how long each post is and how quickly they get truncated. Clicking through for a long essay post is fine. Clicking through for a post that’s only one paragraph? That would be a little annoying. Especially if there’s a lot of little separate posts like that, to the point that the need for a clickthrough feels disruptive.
For most posts I’d expect that re-formatting or re-styling the text wouldn’t make much of a difference, though there can be exceptions. I made some custom thematic styling for my recent post about Bluesky, for instance, and some people might go above and beyond with little flourishes that would lose something in translation. I’d expect that’s not the norm, though.
I have used an RSS reader for years, but lately I have felt like it takes away some personality from a blog. That’s why recently I have starting using one (Lire) that allows me to configure, for each feed, whether I want to read a post as RSS text, or in the context of the original web page. And in most cases I choose the latter option. I feel I get to know the author better.
I’ve never really thought of digital media as being devalued by being easily reproducible, but maybe I’m just so used to it. A recording of a concert or a photograph of a painting definitely doesn’t capture the true feel of the original, but I think things that are intended primarily for computers and the web don’t depend as much on context to have value. Of course, historical context still matters a lot with any kind of media.
I do agree with the author’s sentiment of AI generated content devaluing human-made content in the sense that it makes it hard to tell what’s real and what’s not. However, even with generative AI being as advanced as it is and being around for quite a few years now, it’s only on mainstream social media platforms that I really worry about whether what I’m seeing is made by a human or an AI. When it comes to small web spaces, there really is no incentive to use AI since money, popularity, and wide reach are mostly taken out of the equation.
As far as RSS goes, I always click on entries to open the original page, so I guess whether or not it removes valuable context depends on how it’s used. I’ve always thought of RSS as something that updates me with links to web pages, not something I would use to view text and media without having to leave the feed reader.
I came across a blog through the Bear Blog discovery feed and quickly became intrigued by the stories within — in particular there was a fun read about math as a kind of existential horror. Only later did I discover that the space claims to be a haven for AI generated content. I’m disappointed, but I can’t decide if it’s more directed at the site operator or at myself for not noticing sooner.
Honestly, I hate “AI” as a term because it summons thoughts about science fiction which hardly reflect the technology as it exists today.
Hmm, maybe AI-generated content is a bigger problem outside of social media than I thought, then. I’m totally with you on not liking the term “AI,” it gives way too much credit to these systems when all they really do is just imitate humans and there’s nothing “intelligent” about them at all.
Recently started watching Ways of Seeing by John Berger so I’ve been thinking about this a lot! I feel most media in this digital age are designed with the idea that they are going to be proliferated across numerous different screens, websites, even physical environments, so they are designed contextless. Its “aura” doesn’t “fade” in the same way because its meaning isn’t inextricably linked to its context, unlike an old European painting which was probably only meant to be seen in some rich guy’s house.
I don’t use a RSS reader (I’m used to just manually looking up websites I want to update myself on anyway), but it’s interesting to apply the idea of “aura” to something so digital! Though if an author has set up an RSS feed, I imagine they are already formatting their writing to be readable across different “contexts”. I’d even argue that since the web is itself a huge force in the reproduction of media, even visiting the author’s website is still visiting it out of its original context, for you are viewing it on your own screen, in your own house. But the author’s words still impact you more or less the same way because this is what they accommodate for.
Very valid points. Unless multimedia artistry comes into play, it’s almost certainly the text itself that’s most meaningful and contextually useful. Not the fonts, not the colors, the words. Still, I can’t help but bristle a bit at the idea, not because RSS is inherently a bad thing—it isn’t—but simply because I conflate the convenience with “snackability”, a horrific label I often hear these days as it pertains to content. I’m guilty of all too often fixating on silly details, so please forgive the distraction. There’s also a part of me that just forlornly reminisces about the act of actually visiting/surfing; it’s just a romanticization of something that is neither lost nor romantic.
