7 ms·

The API Terms of Use haven't changed: https://dev.twitter.com/overview/terms https://dev.twitter.com/overview/terms The most egregious of which continues to b

The API Terms of Use haven't changed: https://dev.twitter.com/overview/terms https://dev.twitter.com/overview/terms The most egregious of which continues to be: "Apps replicating Twitter’s core user experience (what we’ve called “traditional Twitter clients”) are discouraged and have a ceiling of 100,000 users, among other restrictions. Be sure to read the applicable TOS clauses carefully if you’re considering building such an app." This is really bad as "core user experience" is something open to a very wide degree of interpretation.

lemevi 11y ago
Yeah, until they revert this change, it doesn't matter and to be honest I doubt developers even care about Twitter anymore. I certainly don't.
guan 11y ago
I couldn’t find video of Dorsey’s remarks. Was there any hint that Twitter might relax those restrictions?
- killwhitey 11y ago
  Here's the video https://twitter.com/Flight/status/656882929923059713 https://twitter.com/Flight/status/656882929923059713
homulilly 11y ago
Yeah as long as this policy remains in effect nobody's going to get back on board.
chimeracoder 11y ago
I maintain the Twitter API client library for a popular language, and I have a love-hate relationship with the Twitter API. Parts of it are really nice, but sometimes I feel like I'm playing whack-a-mole with the documentation. The example responses they provide are correct... except when they aren't. They use heterogenous JSON in their responses (silently replacing string literals with arrays, but only for some responses, etc.). They've added error codes without updating the docs for months on end (which sort of defeats the point of an error code - what use is it if you don't know what the error means?) The only way I'm notified of these changes is when people file bug reports with the library, and I always have to ask them to tell me the exact query that cause the error for them, because they're almost impossible to reproduce otherwise[0], and the API is so inconsistent that I can't try and manually search for similar responses that will cause the error. On the other hand, the Twitter API is a seamless[1] way to interface with an incredibly useful and powerful product, and it's a great source of data. I just wish the developer experience were seamless. [0] e.g. https://github.com/ChimeraCoder/anaconda/issues/82 https://github.com/ChimeraCoder/anaconda/issues/82 [1] Assuming your client library works, but I can't assume that if I'm the one responsible for maintaining it!
- MichaelGG 11y ago
  Yeah but compared to Facebook and others, Twitter's an absolute dream. Instagram, for instance, had outdated docs, and took to embedding comments in the JSON response (extra fields) telling you certain fields shouldn't be used. Jeez.
  - babuskov 11y ago
    I find Facebook docs and APIs to be really good. The only drawback is that they are changing it too often for my liking.
    - blakeyrat 11y ago
      I found Facebook docs and APIs to be really good, until they changed one which completely broke a revenue-generating app and didn't post any notification of the change until a week after it had already gone live. That was a few years back, maybe they're better now. But I doubt it. Both Facebook and Twitter are a complete dream compared to Valve's API for Steam and Team Fortress 2. Working with that is a complete nightmare, if it even provides a fraction of the capability you need (which it almost certainly does not).
      - lnanek2 11y ago
        They are still pretty bad. I'm struggling through a Unity integration right now where we need to use the latest Facebook plugin for Unity, but all their examples and tutorials don't compile with it because they renamed interfaces and the like.
      - Omniusaspirer 11y ago
        SteamRE is what you're looking for, don't even waste your time with Valve API's.
        blakeyrat 11y ago
        Would be nice if their website gave even an extremely vague idea of what features it has implemented...
flurp 11y ago
I actually think they've been very clear on this from the beginning, including the reason why (although it wasn't spelled out). They've always meant apps that offer more or less the same functionality as official Twitter clients. For the people who actually read the terms instead of picking up their pitchforks back when Twitter had that big tos "change of heart" would have understood that They definitely could have handled it better and been clear that the user limit was really meant for Twitter-clones. It's clear they want to control the way most people use Twitter, but also to show advertising. As best I can recall, the tos change came around the same time as they started putting in ads. Besides the few remaining twitter clones always play catchup when Twitter puts out new features (recent example; polls).
- cbsmith 11y ago
  > They've always meant apps that offer more or less the same functionality as official Twitter clients. No, it started out that way, but then the functionality of the official Twitter clients was expended, and then they redefined it to be so broad as to potentially hit anything that tweeted, and they they went farther still and started going after API keys for things that just consumed the data for their own ends.
- callumlocke 11y ago
  Most people would agree it's fair that Twitter wants to disallow outright clones. The problem is it's not obvious where the limits are, as the wording "apps replicating Twitter’s core user experience" is open to interpretation (by Twitter).
  - ksk 11y ago
    >Most people would agree it's fair that Twitter wants to disallow outright clones. I don't. Could you articulate why you think its fair?
    - callumlocke 11y ago
      It's their API, they can offer it to people on whatever terms they want. As long as people know what they're getting into, it's fair.
TallGuyShort 11y ago
Especially since Twitter's "core user experience" is constantly being expanded to include functionality originally provided by third-party applications.
nickbauman 11y ago
Viva La Difference. Twitter could have been a vital component in the "small pieces loosely joined" philosophy of Internet-based applications. Back in its early days I had friends who had servers hooked up to accounts that responded to tweets. It was an amazing thing.
- rhizome 11y ago
  "Small pieces loosely joined" is anathema to VC.
  - jacquesm 11y ago
    Not to really smart VCs. The ones with the long view rather than in-and-out-in-3-years-or-less.
    - JoshTriplett 11y ago
      Even then, you need a business model. Gitlab has a clear business model that works just fine even with the decentralized nature of Git. Nothing Twitter has tried to make money works at all if decentralized, or even if other people build clients for the same central server.
      - jacquesm 11y ago
        That's absolutely true. But note how gitlab has made a product around git, even though git itself is free. There are quite a few products that twitter could have made around twitter itself that they never even looked at. At the same time, their costs are exorbitantly high (see 'whatsapp' for a company that gets this right). I don't think the situation for Twitter is as hopeless as it seems, but then again, I don't run Twitter so maybe that's just my naive optimism.
- riffic 11y ago
  Yep, core "twitter" protocol should have been written up as an RFC and set up de-centralized, like SMTP. Orgs shouldn't have twitter accounts, they should have their own twitter/microblog services!

lemevi 11y ago

Yeah, until they revert this change, it doesn't matter and to be honest I doubt developers even care about Twitter anymore. I certainly don't.

guan 11y ago

I couldn’t find video of Dorsey’s remarks. Was there any hint that Twitter might relax those restrictions?

killwhitey 11y ago
Here's the video https://twitter.com/Flight/status/656882929923059713 https://twitter.com/Flight/status/656882929923059713

homulilly 11y ago

Yeah as long as this policy remains in effect nobody's going to get back on board.

chimeracoder 11y ago

I maintain the Twitter API client library for a popular language, and I have a love-hate relationship with the Twitter API. Parts of it are really nice, but sometimes I feel like I'm playing whack-a-mole with the documentation. The example responses they provide are correct... except when they aren't. They use heterogenous JSON in their responses (silently replacing string literals with arrays, but only for some responses, etc.). They've added error codes without updating the docs for months on end (which sort of defeats the point of an error code - what use is it if you don't know what the error means?) The only way I'm notified of these changes is when people file bug reports with the library, and I always have to ask them to tell me the exact query that cause the error for them, because they're almost impossible to reproduce otherwise[0], and the API is so inconsistent that I can't try and manually search for similar responses that will cause the error. On the other hand, the Twitter API is a seamless[1] way to interface with an incredibly useful and powerful product, and it's a great source of data. I just wish the developer experience were seamless. [0] e.g. https://github.com/ChimeraCoder/anaconda/issues/82 https://github.com/ChimeraCoder/anaconda/issues/82 [1] Assuming your client library works, but I can't assume that if I'm the one responsible for maintaining it!

MichaelGG 11y ago
Yeah but compared to Facebook and others, Twitter's an absolute dream. Instagram, for instance, had outdated docs, and took to embedding comments in the JSON response (extra fields) telling you certain fields shouldn't be used. Jeez.
- babuskov 11y ago
  I find Facebook docs and APIs to be really good. The only drawback is that they are changing it too often for my liking.
  - blakeyrat 11y ago
    I found Facebook docs and APIs to be really good, until they changed one which completely broke a revenue-generating app and didn't post any notification of the change until a week after it had already gone live. That was a few years back, maybe they're better now. But I doubt it. Both Facebook and Twitter are a complete dream compared to Valve's API for Steam and Team Fortress 2. Working with that is a complete nightmare, if it even provides a fraction of the capability you need (which it almost certainly does not).
    - lnanek2 11y ago
      They are still pretty bad. I'm struggling through a Unity integration right now where we need to use the latest Facebook plugin for Unity, but all their examples and tutorials don't compile with it because they renamed interfaces and the like.
    - Omniusaspirer 11y ago
      SteamRE is what you're looking for, don't even waste your time with Valve API's.
      - blakeyrat 11y ago
        Would be nice if their website gave even an extremely vague idea of what features it has implemented...

flurp 11y ago

I actually think they've been very clear on this from the beginning, including the reason why (although it wasn't spelled out). They've always meant apps that offer more or less the same functionality as official Twitter clients. For the people who actually read the terms instead of picking up their pitchforks back when Twitter had that big tos "change of heart" would have understood that They definitely could have handled it better and been clear that the user limit was really meant for Twitter-clones. It's clear they want to control the way most people use Twitter, but also to show advertising. As best I can recall, the tos change came around the same time as they started putting in ads. Besides the few remaining twitter clones always play catchup when Twitter puts out new features (recent example; polls).

cbsmith 11y ago
> They've always meant apps that offer more or less the same functionality as official Twitter clients. No, it started out that way, but then the functionality of the official Twitter clients was expended, and then they redefined it to be so broad as to potentially hit anything that tweeted, and they they went farther still and started going after API keys for things that just consumed the data for their own ends.
callumlocke 11y ago
Most people would agree it's fair that Twitter wants to disallow outright clones. The problem is it's not obvious where the limits are, as the wording "apps replicating Twitter’s core user experience" is open to interpretation (by Twitter).
- ksk 11y ago
  >Most people would agree it's fair that Twitter wants to disallow outright clones. I don't. Could you articulate why you think its fair?
  - callumlocke 11y ago
    It's their API, they can offer it to people on whatever terms they want. As long as people know what they're getting into, it's fair.

TallGuyShort 11y ago

Especially since Twitter's "core user experience" is constantly being expanded to include functionality originally provided by third-party applications.

nickbauman 11y ago

Viva La Difference. Twitter could have been a vital component in the "small pieces loosely joined" philosophy of Internet-based applications. Back in its early days I had friends who had servers hooked up to accounts that responded to tweets. It was an amazing thing.

rhizome 11y ago
"Small pieces loosely joined" is anathema to VC.
- jacquesm 11y ago
  Not to really smart VCs. The ones with the long view rather than in-and-out-in-3-years-or-less.
  - JoshTriplett 11y ago
    Even then, you need a business model. Gitlab has a clear business model that works just fine even with the decentralized nature of Git. Nothing Twitter has tried to make money works at all if decentralized, or even if other people build clients for the same central server.
    - jacquesm 11y ago
      That's absolutely true. But note how gitlab has made a product around git, even though git itself is free. There are quite a few products that twitter could have made around twitter itself that they never even looked at. At the same time, their costs are exorbitantly high (see 'whatsapp' for a company that gets this right). I don't think the situation for Twitter is as hopeless as it seems, but then again, I don't run Twitter so maybe that's just my naive optimism.
riffic 11y ago
Yep, core "twitter" protocol should have been written up as an RFC and set up de-centralized, like SMTP. Orgs shouldn't have twitter accounts, they should have their own twitter/microblog services!