I've been seeing this statement more and more and I'm really kinda tired of it? I get it, I get what they're saying, but it's an entirely bullshit sentiment that exists more as a contrarian attempts to shut conversations down than anything else. It completely ignores what peoples issues are with algorithmically curated timelines are in favour of extremely online "well actually" behaviour
Is it technically correct? Sure, kinda, I guess, but only in a way where it's a real fuckin' dramatic stretch of the definition! When people are talking about algorithms, they're talking about opaque behaviour that's entirely outside of their control, that changes against their will, that people can game to their advantage if they just figure out the hidden rules. It's shit like how YouTube thumbnails are weird and off putting in different ways every few months, how for a while on twitter t-shirts we're THE BIGGEST THING IN THE WORLD
But it's never been "sixty seconds to a minute, sixty minutes to an hour." Time is extremely scruitable, effectively everyone always has something that tells them what time it is at a glance, we are grounded in the linear march of time whether we like it or not!
But
More than that
When we follow somebody and they share something, that is no more an algorithmic expression than AI art is actually creative. The other person on the end of that is a person with their own thoughts and experiences. We can get to know them, talk to them, understand them via what they share. We can get a feel for their interests and all those things can drive how we choose to involve them in our lives! You can't do that with an algorithm because the algorithm will always just be math
So no, a chronological timeline is not "an algorithm too" unless you're just trying to shut down complaints about algorithms