Algorithmic vs. non-algorithmic internet: how to use the web well

Executive overview

Most people frame internet use as all-or-nothing: total abstinence or algorithmic addiction. That framing is wrong. The original promise of the internet — connecting people to others who share their idiosyncratic interests — is still available, but it lives almost entirely outside the major attention platforms.

The distinction that matters is not online vs. offline, but algorithmic vs. non-algorithmic.

The algorithmic internet problem

• Tyler Cowen argues time online is justified because it helps people find "the perfect people for me" — a real and valuable promise.
• The problem: most phone time today is spent on engagement-optimised platforms, not connection-oriented ones.
• Attention platforms (X, TikTok, Instagram) treat users as digital sharecroppers — inputs to a content mill designed to maximise engagement, not human connection.
• First-generation platforms (Facebook, early Instagram) pretended to care about social graphs; newer ones (TikTok) dropped the pretence entirely.
• Forcing hundreds of millions into a single homogeneous feed is unnatural and leaves people "upset and exhausted."

The non-algorithmic internet

• Discussion forums, niche web communities, newsletters, podcasts, blogs, small WhatsApp groups, Strava with local friends, AI for exploratory learning, open-source collaboration.
• None of these optimise for engagement; all can serve genuine connection or learning.
• Even large platforms can be used non-algorithmically — e.g. accessing only a Facebook group while blocking the news feed.
• The non-algorithmic internet is not addictive, does not displace other important activities, and is a net positive.

Balancing digital and in-person community

• Online connections with "perfectly matched" people are valuable but insufficient on their own.
• The brain requires regular, in-person, reciprocal social contact to feel genuinely embedded in a community.
• Heterogeneity in social connections — people who share your community but not your exact interests — is itself important.
• A healthy social life combines non-algorithmic digital connection with sustained local community investment.

Deep breaks vs. sustainable work pace

• A deep break means resting without loading a conflicting cognitive context — a walk or unrelated podcast, not email.
• Checking email during a break from hard cognitive work scrambles the mental context and makes returning to focus much harder.
• Deep breaks and work sustainability are separate problems: deep breaks manage cognition; sustainability requires working on fewer things simultaneously.
• Every concurrent project brings administrative overhead (emails, meetings, decisions) that accumulates and causes burnout.

Parenting and deep work

• For people with standard office jobs, deep work happens at the office — children in childcare during those hours do not directly block it.
• Two real interference mechanisms: tiredness from disrupted sleep, and the psychological footprint of worrying about children while trying to concentrate.
• The psychological footprint disproportionately affects mothers.
• Practical responses: tighter time-blocking when at work, moderating deep work expectations during the early years, knowing it gets substantially easier as children age.

Academia as a winner-take-all field

• Winner-take-all fields have a clear competitive structure; only top performers succeed regardless of creative positioning.
• Auction markets reward unique skill combinations — no one else occupies your niche, so you don't have to outcompete a ranked field.
• R1 tenure-track academia is a winner-take-all field: publication count and venue quality are the near-exclusive metrics.
• There is no side-door strategy; attempting to "combine interests in a novel way" to substitute for publication record does not work.
• If you want a tenure-track position at a research university, honestly assess whether you can compete at the top of that field — then publish relentlessly.

Follow your passion vs. lifestyle-centric career planning

• "Follow your passion" is job-specific advice that assumes the right job will deliver overall life satisfaction.
• It fails because it often forces compromises on location, rhythm, relationships, and other lifestyle factors that matter more than job identity.
• Lifestyle-centric career planning: define the day-to-day life you want first, then work backwards to identify jobs and strategies that could get you there.
• The job becomes a lever toward a target lifestyle, not the source of contentment itself.
• Working backwards opens many paths; following a single passion narrows to one, which may be unattainable.

Containing meetings in a meeting-heavy role

• Use automated scheduling tools (Calendly, etc.) to control when meetings happen, not whether they happen — protect mornings or other focus blocks.
• Schedule meetings longer than the meeting itself: a 15-minute meeting books 30 minutes so you have 15 minutes to process notes and close the context before the next task.
• Require a pre-meeting document from anyone requesting your time: the decision to be made, relevant information, and what help is needed. Roughly half of meeting requests disappear when this friction is introduced.
• Use daily office hours (one hour) for quick questions — this alone can eliminate a third of scheduled meetings.
• Back-to-back meetings are costly: unfinished tasks from the first meeting stay active in working memory during the second.

April books

• I, Robot — Isaac Asimov; short story collection dealing with moral quandaries of intelligent robots, surprisingly relevant to current AI debates.
• After Disney — Neil O'Brien; narrative business history of the post-Walt Disney era.
• The Baseball Book of Why — John McAllister; light seasonal read.
• The Technological Republic — Alexander Karp and Nicholas Zamiska; argues Silicon Valley should build ambitious, societally important technology rather than engagement-optimised apps.
• Everything Is Tuberculosis — John Green; history of tuberculosis interwoven with personal narrative and policy critique.