Doyce discusses simplifying his (virtual) life by cutting back on his Google Reader feeds.
I feel your pain.
I currently have about … oh … 202 feeds I subscribe to. That’s not counting another couple of dozen that I’ve move into an “old” folder for ones that I can’t bear to delete but don’t want to keep seeing.
Yeah. Pathetic.
I really should cut down. Because, actually, I don’t read all of them. I don’t read more than a fraction of them. They fall into three main categories:
- Never get around to reading (but think I should*).
- Read a chunk of every couple of weeks (and wish I read more*).
- Read religiously.
I should get rid of #1. I should seriously examine #2. And leave #3 alone.
“I can quit any time …”
* See, this is what gets me in trouble.
30 view(s)
The insidious nature of Google Reader is the misconception that, well, you never have to actually ready anything, so you might as well subscribe to the feed of anything that looks at all remotely interesting.
Because that then leads to (cough) hundreds of feeds that you never read, and not only does the clutter mean you don’t look at the stuff that you really want to, the overwhelming sense of OMG I’M FALLING BEHIND SO I CANNOT READ ANYTHING BECAUSE I HAVE TO READ EVERYTHING (at least for us OCD completist sorts) is, in fact, a serious cost.
Some sites slowly drift away.
Some sites lose their luster.
Some sites are no longer part of a current obsession of mine.
Some sites looked like a great idea but quickly fizzled out.
Some sites demand way too much time.
Hmmmm … websites are not wholly unlike relationships.
And I’ve now officially trimmed down the list to 89.
Anything I don’t recall having actually looked at lately is gone.
There’s still probably more fat I could trim, and I *did* keep track of all the sites I deleted (for some hypothetical day when I have infinite time to brows the web), but the list is now hopefully a bit more manageable.
Everyone repeat after me: Just because a site has one interesting post doesn’t mean I should immediately create an entry in Google Reader for it …
RSS aggregators are just one part of the problem. Then there’s magazines: The Economist, New Scientist, Scientific American, MIT Technology Review, National Geographic, American Heritage Science & Technology, Church & State, The Chicago Tribune, and yes (I admit it) Wired. And books – the stack is always 5 to 10 high.
When I was a kid I figured I’d get to read whatever I want when I grew up. The cruel fate is, there isn’t enough time. If only some nuclear holocaust would take place and then I could catch up… but then my glasses would fall off and break. It isn’t fair I tell you! It’s not fair!!!
Yeah, I do have serious Burgess Meredith syndrome. That’s one reason why my magazine subscriptions are minimal. Not enough hours in the day.
I keep hoping to win the Lottery. Then I’d have plenty of time on my hands, right? Of course, it would help if I actually *played* the Lottery.
We like to think we’ll live a life of lazy self-indulgence but that would be too boring. I was telling a co-worker what non-profit institute I’d create if I won the lottery and he said that if that happened, I’d probably work myself to death.