When you boil it down Twitter, Facebook, and G+ do the exact same thing as RSS,but they are all just easier,less flexible, closed and more centralized. You publish something and your subscribers receive it....seems at least vaguely related to me, imo.
How exactly is Twitter the exact same thing as RSS? I don't really see how someone tweeting about a new blog post being the same as what RSS does in any way other than being notified that a blog post has been written and possibly a title. I agree it is pubsub but that's pretty shaky. If the implication is that because we have Twitter then we do not need RSS .. I just think that's sort of ridiculous; is 140 characters the end of the road now? If not then Twitter is not a great solution to replace RSS. You can argue that RSS feeds have become like unread email but I think that is a different issue.
For non-techies Twitter achieves what they would use RSS for (notification of content) with convenient annotations. Yes they are very different, but that's how it works in principle. I doubt RSS will ever be completely gone, but the number of human readers was never high and is unlikely to go up in future.
Even apps that make use of it will be moving away from the user being directly aware of it.
I agree with you. I wasn't saying twitter is the exact same thing. Just vaguely related (as you said.. pubsub). Even without the character limit Twitter's functionality is a subset of what you can do with RSS.
