downer63

A condom ain't nothin' but a bridge for a crab, lad.

I'd avoid saying anything at all if the article wasn't factually wrong about RSS being a disused format.

And there's nothing factually wrong about RSS providing weaker data to ad-tech survellance. The only reason it's being pushed back onto the front burner, is because the Facebook election botch has got everyone spooked about analytics trackers, and lots of richer sources are going dark, putting RSS back on an even footing with the usual web tracker data sources, because everyone is blocking thirdparty scripts and resources.

Meanwhile, pretty sure the guy is operating as a tool for a paycheck sourced from the industry the article serves, and having qualifications only helps to support such theories, since credibility makes the opinion of a stooge all the more valuable. Maybe I should lump you in with him.

  "as a joke"

There's no need to project motive onto such a premise. One needs only to question the possibility of movement.

Religious rituals are just as likely, as well as being deposited with ani al droppings after becoming an unfortunate snack for some scavenger or carnivore. Also flood runoff, why not?

That's because the author is a tool of the global ad-tech agenda, writing articles with click-bait headlines. RSS isn't a particularly profitable utility to inject ads into, or suck personal info out of (less cookies, no pixels, makes an MBA yawn in meetings), so I guess that means it's "dead" right?

Oh noes! Markdown is dead!

Oh noes! SOAP XML is dead!

Oh noes! RESTful JSON is dead!

How the fuck would a non-coding journalist know the difference?

It's worth it to expand the conversation. Drugs aren't incredible, and really, seriously wouldn't be worth the effort even if they were 100% legal.

And how many people get sucked into the party kid bullshit, because they want to fit in and impress people. AKA: doing drugs to seem edgy.

Except, it's not optimized if I never wanted it in the first place.

And by the way, I already pay over $150 for monthly internet, when I combine phone and cable/fiber, and I pay for about ten premium services including The New York Times, HBO, Hulu, iTunes, Amazon, Youtube/Google and Netflix, and I still see ads, so what's going on here? What does an ad-free life actually cost?

Tell me, I want to know. Or was that simply an unrealistic option never actually on the table to begin with?

To be brutally honest, recreational drug use is absurdly overrated, and the people that insist on engaging in cool kid drug experimentation merit badges are selfish to the point that they wouldn't be missed. Bombs away, and let it burn.