> Maybe the science fiction version would be an intent-less / ambient search engine.

I think that's what Google at one point said they wanted to do, it just requires a lot of your private data... ironically the same people that would probably most enjoy higher signal feeds are going to be more stingy with their data than average feed dopamine enjoooyer. 

Surely a fortune to be made figuring this out. 

justin_shocknet

mostly_harmless

The dead internet vs the Lightning network

elvismercury

You described _evergreen_ the way I intend the term -- doesn't matter when it was written, it's relevant now.  Although you added a distinction that complicates it a bit -- the relevance would evolve based on your own evolution.  

_Crime and Punishment_ references from a hundred years ago were not relevant a month ago, now they are.  So it's less about the thing, even if it's a high-quality and timeless thing, and more about the interface between you and the thing, whoever you happen to be at the moment.  

Maybe the science fiction version would be an intent-less / ambient search engine.