5 ms·

> Interesting that Twitter is shipping features faster than ever after 80% layoffs. I don't know if deliberately breaking their developer API for third party c

> Interesting that Twitter is shipping features faster than ever after 80% layoffs. I don't know if deliberately breaking their developer API for third party clients counts as "shipping features faster than ever".

astrange 4y ago
They also put back the "for you" tab to force people into algorithmic timelines, which they already tried once and pulled back since everyone hated it.
adam_arthur 4y ago
They obviously did that because the API is not benefiting them at all from a revenue perspective. If it were, they wouldn't have gotten rid of it. Twitter was run as a charity prior to the acquisition. Just as many VC fat tech companies were
- pwinnski 4y ago
  This is "obviously" based on... no communication whatsoever from the company yet. Another comment of yours says "quite obvious" about advertising, which doesn't seem to be an industry segment in which you work. It seems your observations are right in line with Twitter's new owner, to whom everything that's happened over the last few months has also been "obvious," and mostly wrong.
  - adam_arthur 4y ago
    Yes, Elon who made Tesla and SpaceX some of the largest companies in the world in just a few years, and likely many more over the next two decades is a totally incompetent buffoon. I’d rather take his side than the small minded and intellectually weak detractors. Just because things tend to be a certain way, doesn’t make it optimal or right. Evidence, all of history where bad practices were pervasive and common and later usurped by better practices. Maybe use forethought and critical thinking rather than credentialism and groupthink
    - anotherman554 4y ago
      If Elon is mismanaging Twitter your post would be a good example of the cognitive bias called the Halo effect: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halo_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halo_effect
      - adam_arthur 4y ago
        To say that somebody’s success at tasks that are highly correlated with a separate task is irrelevant is simply wrong. And people who tend to succeed at most things they do, tend to do so for a reason. It’s effectively statistically impossible for it to be sheer coincidence/luck. Or should I just pick random “logical fallacy” links to put in my replies instead?
        deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
        anotherman554 4y ago
        If a baseball teams wins their first four games and you see them in the seventh inning behind by 30 points in game 5, when you predict game 5's winner is the relevant correlation how the team did in games 1 to 4 or is the relevant correlation how a team who is that far behind a particular game tends to do? I simply noted you appear incapable of perceiving Elon as making bad decisions, which is kind of funny, since he seemed to think agreeing to buy Twitter was a bad decision, and was in the process of losing a court case about it before he saw the writing on the wall and closed the agreement. If he actually is making bad decisions, I think the halo effect is at play.
    - _zzaw 4y ago
      The level of nastiness in your comments here makes it very hard to take you seriously as an "objective" observer. Considering that you're using your HN profile to attract clients—"Hire me for your development needs!"—you might want to tone that down. I wouldn't want to work with anyone who thought it was appropriate to behave that way. (And I'll say your rosy impression of Twitter seems a little strange for a supposedly objective observer, given the recent outages/pervasive legal problems/chaotic feature rollouts/various fits and reversals/overall dysfunction that has characterized that company since it was acquired by Elon Musk.)
- ReflectedImage 4y ago
  The API benefitted power users primarily who are responsible for keeping their large number of followers on Twitter.
  - adam_arthur 4y ago
    Let’s see where those power users go, shall we?
- dvt 4y ago
  > They obviously did that because the API is not benefiting them at all from a revenue perspective. If it were, they wouldn't have gotten rid of it. Everyone hates on Dorsey because he essentially turned Twitter into a walled garden (killed third-party clients + RSS support), but really, how else are you supposed to make a startup that got millions in funding profitable? Just by giving your stuff away?
  - KerrAvon 4y ago
    Nobody begrudges Twitter the right to (the opportunity to) make money. It's not clear why they decided not to work with the clients. They could have put ads into the API feeds and required that clients not filter them out, or some such thing. And it's fine that they didn't. It's even fine that they shut down the API. But the lack of communication is ridiculous. Just tell people what the fuck is happening. They don't have to like it, but complete ghosting is the way you burn bridges completely down.
  - patrickmay 4y ago
    Charge for API access. Learn what features users want from the third party tools. Implement those. Profit.
- pessimizer 4y ago
  Not willingly: Twitter to Devs: Don't Make Twitter Clients... Or Else [2011] https://mashable.com/archive/twitter-api-clients https://mashable.com/archive/twitter-api-clients Twitter's API Update Cuts Off Oxygen to Third-Party Clients [2012] https://mashable.com/archive/twitter-api-big-changes https://mashable.com/archive/twitter-api-big-changes (how could Elon do this!?)
  - sleepybrett 4y ago
    But amazingly third party clients still thrived even after those API nerfs for over 10 years. I mean it's within his right to do it, and I can even see the arguments. However, to do it without even a press release let alone notice. Without even answering support tickets from those third party clients. Just an utter failure of management.

astrange 4y ago

They also put back the "for you" tab to force people into algorithmic timelines, which they already tried once and pulled back since everyone hated it.

adam_arthur 4y ago

They obviously did that because the API is not benefiting them at all from a revenue perspective. If it were, they wouldn't have gotten rid of it. Twitter was run as a charity prior to the acquisition. Just as many VC fat tech companies were

pwinnski 4y ago
This is "obviously" based on... no communication whatsoever from the company yet. Another comment of yours says "quite obvious" about advertising, which doesn't seem to be an industry segment in which you work. It seems your observations are right in line with Twitter's new owner, to whom everything that's happened over the last few months has also been "obvious," and mostly wrong.
- adam_arthur 4y ago
  Yes, Elon who made Tesla and SpaceX some of the largest companies in the world in just a few years, and likely many more over the next two decades is a totally incompetent buffoon. I’d rather take his side than the small minded and intellectually weak detractors. Just because things tend to be a certain way, doesn’t make it optimal or right. Evidence, all of history where bad practices were pervasive and common and later usurped by better practices. Maybe use forethought and critical thinking rather than credentialism and groupthink
  - anotherman554 4y ago
    If Elon is mismanaging Twitter your post would be a good example of the cognitive bias called the Halo effect: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halo_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halo_effect
    - adam_arthur 4y ago
      To say that somebody’s success at tasks that are highly correlated with a separate task is irrelevant is simply wrong. And people who tend to succeed at most things they do, tend to do so for a reason. It’s effectively statistically impossible for it to be sheer coincidence/luck. Or should I just pick random “logical fallacy” links to put in my replies instead?
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
      - anotherman554 4y ago
        If a baseball teams wins their first four games and you see them in the seventh inning behind by 30 points in game 5, when you predict game 5's winner is the relevant correlation how the team did in games 1 to 4 or is the relevant correlation how a team who is that far behind a particular game tends to do? I simply noted you appear incapable of perceiving Elon as making bad decisions, which is kind of funny, since he seemed to think agreeing to buy Twitter was a bad decision, and was in the process of losing a court case about it before he saw the writing on the wall and closed the agreement. If he actually is making bad decisions, I think the halo effect is at play.
  - _zzaw 4y ago
    The level of nastiness in your comments here makes it very hard to take you seriously as an "objective" observer. Considering that you're using your HN profile to attract clients—"Hire me for your development needs!"—you might want to tone that down. I wouldn't want to work with anyone who thought it was appropriate to behave that way. (And I'll say your rosy impression of Twitter seems a little strange for a supposedly objective observer, given the recent outages/pervasive legal problems/chaotic feature rollouts/various fits and reversals/overall dysfunction that has characterized that company since it was acquired by Elon Musk.)
ReflectedImage 4y ago
The API benefitted power users primarily who are responsible for keeping their large number of followers on Twitter.
- adam_arthur 4y ago
  Let’s see where those power users go, shall we?
dvt 4y ago
> They obviously did that because the API is not benefiting them at all from a revenue perspective. If it were, they wouldn't have gotten rid of it. Everyone hates on Dorsey because he essentially turned Twitter into a walled garden (killed third-party clients + RSS support), but really, how else are you supposed to make a startup that got millions in funding profitable? Just by giving your stuff away?
- KerrAvon 4y ago
  Nobody begrudges Twitter the right to (the opportunity to) make money. It's not clear why they decided not to work with the clients. They could have put ads into the API feeds and required that clients not filter them out, or some such thing. And it's fine that they didn't. It's even fine that they shut down the API. But the lack of communication is ridiculous. Just tell people what the fuck is happening. They don't have to like it, but complete ghosting is the way you burn bridges completely down.
- patrickmay 4y ago
  Charge for API access. Learn what features users want from the third party tools. Implement those. Profit.
pessimizer 4y ago
Not willingly: Twitter to Devs: Don't Make Twitter Clients... Or Else [2011] https://mashable.com/archive/twitter-api-clients https://mashable.com/archive/twitter-api-clients Twitter's API Update Cuts Off Oxygen to Third-Party Clients [2012] https://mashable.com/archive/twitter-api-big-changes https://mashable.com/archive/twitter-api-big-changes (how could Elon do this!?)
- sleepybrett 4y ago
  But amazingly third party clients still thrived even after those API nerfs for over 10 years. I mean it's within his right to do it, and I can even see the arguments. However, to do it without even a press release let alone notice. Without even answering support tickets from those third party clients. Just an utter failure of management.