You can't possibly do anything to "put an end to this."
Twitter and Bluesky both allow you to see a chronological feed, though you have to jump through some hoops to get to it. Just use that.
And this is where the goals of the platforms and their users are at odds with each other.
> Just use that.
The problem is that while I can "just use that", which of course I do, the mere presence of an algorithmic timeline, let alone as the default option, still substantially shapes the way people post and share.
People post differently when they expect interactions from outside of their usual network vs when they don't. I had my tweets get uncomfortably popular on several occasions, presumably because the algorithm decided so, and I didn't enjoy that.
Then there's also the problem that some people you follow will use the algorithmic feed and will repost things from there. Again, this wouldn't happen if it didn't exist, and it's not something I can influence with my choices.
What I want is for content to spread organically again. I want the platform to be a dumb pipe between me and the people I follow. I don't want it to have any agency whatsoever. And I don't want "influencers" to be possible.
They can be, but they usually mostly aren't. Showing people what they like is the best way to get them to come back.
I think you need to accept that what you want is different from what most people want.
> I want the platform to be a dumb pipe between me and the people I follow.
I guess your only hope would be to make it illegal, worldwide, to provide algorithmic feeds.
Hacker News uses an algorithmic feed, and that's why we're here talking. https://news.ycombinator.com/newest exists but it's not very good. You can also browse Reddit chronologically https://www.reddit.com/new/ but, seriously, don't bother.
So, as long as someone can do algorithmic feeds, someone will, and people will use it, even you, because algorithmic feeds are just better than chronological feeds.
> I don't want "influencers" to be possible.
This one is truly hopeless. We've had influencers at least as long as we've had the written word.
There are different usage scenarios of social media. You seem to imply that people use it for entertainment, and yes, the companies themselves sure make them optimized for that. But I want to use social media for staying up to date on my friends' lives and nothing else. Most existing platforms actively resist this use case because it doesn't grow metrics.
> I guess your only hope would be to make it illegal, worldwide, to provide algorithmic feeds.
Well, at least I'm working on two fediverse projects. There are no algorithms on the fediverse. You see posts from the people you follow, in the order in which they were posted, and nothing else.
> We've had influencers at least as long as we've had the written word.
That's different. Those "influencers" always became such organically, because people voluntarily spread their "content". This is vastly different from the platform itself stepping in and non-consensually shoving this content into millions of faces because its black-box algorithm said so.
It also tries really hard to direct you over to the For You feed silently at any chance it can get.
Also among followers it will surface tweets that it thinks will drive engagement and show/not show retweets based on algorithm.
You can't possibly do anything to "put an end to this".