[chrisfinne]

Agreed.

I'm sure there were many reasons it died, but my theory is that Google strategically wanted to kill it because the User was in control of the data-sources and the algorithm. Google wanted people to migrate to Google+, News, etc. where they control what you see.

This is what Facebook and Twitter did. Their feeds used to be a simple chrono sort of sources you determined, but then they slowly took control.

In my mind, all these companies have shifted from being Platforms to being Publishers. While they aren't writing the content, they are actively choosing what content you see and don't see, i.e. being the Editor.

[wp381640]

I can't figure out what I've read up to on Twitter anymore since it shuffles tweets around and inserts random "your follower also follows this person" tweets which I didn't ask for

[tildedave]

If you turn off the "show the best tweets first" option in your content preferences you get a chronological timeline back. (They made this change a month or two ago)

[wp381640]

That's it! Thank you

[jpindar]

Have you tried using Tweetdeck? It puts that kind of stuff in a separate column which you can show or hide as you wish. The main column is chronological.

[larkeith]

The fact that such a service is necessary is a bad sign for Twitter's UX.

[_nub3]

This is by far the best explanation I've read. Thx for making my day.

[rexpop]

It's a chilling distillation of the fact that making us happy is tangential to underlying corporate motives.

[lamby]

> the User was in control of the data-sources

I think this might be right, but this could be because it was an thus an awful interface for anyone who wasn't somewhat along the HN-user spectrum of technical nous.

[octygen]

Amen to the above. There are alternatives... But GR was by far the best.