5 ms·

The question I have with this move is why didn't Twitter just force advertising as part of their API for third party clients? Just change the TOS for using the

by jdoss 4y ago

The question I have with this move is why didn't Twitter just force advertising as part of their API for third party clients? Just change the TOS for using the API so if they didn't show advertising they would be cut off. What am I missing?

bradgessler 4y ago
The list of unforced errors is insane. Remember when pg was banned from Twitter for mentioning that he had a link to Mastodon on his website? https://finance.yahoo.com/news/twitter-suspends-account-paul-graham-232754736.html https://finance.yahoo.com/news/twitter-suspends-account-paul...
- AlexandrB 4y ago
  Move fast and break your $44B investment.
- yamtaddle 4y ago
  I followed some of that and it was especially funny that he had just been defending Musk and posting some "well he's a super-genius—you know, like all us rich SV types—so we should give him the benefit of the doubt" sort of stuff, right before that happened. The whole thing was truly beautiful. Overall, Musk's acquisition has provided some excellent entertainment.
  - peanuty1 4y ago
    "It's remarkable how many people who've never run any kind of company think they know how to run a tech company better than someone who's run Tesla and SpaceX." - Paul Graham https://twitter.com/paulg/status/1592852796185128961 https://twitter.com/paulg/status/1592852796185128961
    - yamtaddle 4y ago
      His quick turn around (there was some, "oh, huh, when you put it that way, perhaps he is making some questionable choices" interaction with another poster) right before the ban was maybe the most perfect example of "I never thought the face-eating leopard would eat my face!" I've ever seen. A moment of dawning realization an instant before the face gets eaten. It was perfect.
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
    - hk__2 4y ago
      Twitter is not just a tech company; it’s a social network.
AlexandrB 4y ago
This was probably easier and the decision was probably made on a whim - no time plan and execute a transition like you're suggesting. I think this theory is supported by the fact that API access was cut with no notice, the ToS was only changed after-the-fact, and some smaller apps - like Twitterific for MacOS - were initially missed.
MBCook 4y ago
“Starting Feb 1st using a third part client will require Twitter Blue.” That’s all it would have taken. Probably would have made a huge increase in subscribers too. This is 100% a control move. He wants full control over how everyone experiences Twitter (not sure why). So this was pulled. Of course you can NEVER go back from this move.
- redox99 4y ago
  That's actually a really good idea
  - justinclift 4y ago
    If they did some kind of revenue share (from Twitter Blue) with the third party clients their users are using, it might even provide useful funding for some of the otherwise non-commercial ones.
    - r00fus 4y ago
      Twitter could think of this as a kind of lead-generation / user retention system. Of course, Blue is essentially a bandaid of $8/mo/user over the gaping chest would that is the cost of the leveraged buyout ($13B) so I doubt Musk would consider tearing of pieces of that bandaid for goodwill or lead gen.
- breput 4y ago
  I can't say I totally saw this coming, but when Elon started talking about the WeChat/Everything App/X, the writing was on the all for 3rd party clients. Still, a very shortsighted move.
  - justinclift 4y ago
    Wouldn't a WeChat type of approach mean encouraging third party clients/integrations/etc?
    - 4y ago
dawnerd 4y ago
Plus didn't the apps have to pay for api access? I know there was some contention around that when the push notification api changed.
- ceejayoz 4y ago
  No, that was for firehose access when Twitter bought Gnip. There was a big fuss over third-party clients being limited to 100k users. Twitter fairly quickly walked back that limit (with additional verification and rules specific to clients reaching that size being required).
jdminhbg 4y ago
Twitter had a decade to implement something simple like this and didn't. I assume that there are technical reasons that it's hard to do with their codebase and it's simply not worth the time and money to do so.
- pornel 4y ago
  Ads come with tracking, so there's probably an issue of trusting all the data that apps would have to send back. Twitter would have to document just how much tracking their ads require, and 3rd party developers could balk at it and cause a stink. OTOH the first party app can track as much as it wants and it'll fly under the radar.
  - dwaite 4y ago
    > OTOH the first party app can track as much as it wants and it'll fly under the radar. Until you get caught, and Apple/Google decide to boot the official app from the stores (if) you broke the respective agreements.
    - jdminhbg 4y ago
      I think there’s a pretty wide delta between tracking that is against App Store rules and tracking that would be controversial when written up on the Twitterific/Tweetbot blogs.
vlunkr 4y ago
They could change the TOS, but actually enforcing would be difficult. You'd have to have something like the app store review process. And another goal here is probably to get everyone using the same clients so they have more control over the experience.
justapassenger 4y ago
Because Musk shoots from the hip all the time. And he’s always smartest person in the room.
kemayo 4y ago
The absence of ad-tweets inserted into the API feed with an API term of "you must display these or we'll ban your app" was always weird. That said, I bet that the real thing they want is the control to be able to push the Twitter Blue premium features, which I'm sure third-party apps would just sideline as much as possible even if they made them all available through the API.
linuxftw 4y ago
How could they actually enforce that? That'd need to review every app, constantly.
robryan 4y ago
The other weird thing is why only some 3rd party clients, was it the big ones that got cut? Harpy which I use seems to be working fine.
evan_ 4y ago
(speculation) they want to push everyone to use the official app so they can get as much user info as possible to sell. They want persistent location and all the other juicy stuff you can't get if a third party is standing in the way.

by jdoss 4y ago

bradgessler 4y ago

The list of unforced errors is insane. Remember when pg was banned from Twitter for mentioning that he had a link to Mastodon on his website? https://finance.yahoo.com/news/twitter-suspends-account-paul-graham-232754736.html https://finance.yahoo.com/news/twitter-suspends-account-paul...

AlexandrB 4y ago
Move fast and break your $44B investment.
yamtaddle 4y ago
I followed some of that and it was especially funny that he had just been defending Musk and posting some "well he's a super-genius—you know, like all us rich SV types—so we should give him the benefit of the doubt" sort of stuff, right before that happened. The whole thing was truly beautiful. Overall, Musk's acquisition has provided some excellent entertainment.
- peanuty1 4y ago
  "It's remarkable how many people who've never run any kind of company think they know how to run a tech company better than someone who's run Tesla and SpaceX." - Paul Graham https://twitter.com/paulg/status/1592852796185128961 https://twitter.com/paulg/status/1592852796185128961
  - yamtaddle 4y ago
    His quick turn around (there was some, "oh, huh, when you put it that way, perhaps he is making some questionable choices" interaction with another poster) right before the ban was maybe the most perfect example of "I never thought the face-eating leopard would eat my face!" I've ever seen. A moment of dawning realization an instant before the face gets eaten. It was perfect.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
  - hk__2 4y ago
    Twitter is not just a tech company; it’s a social network.

AlexandrB 4y ago

This was probably easier and the decision was probably made on a whim - no time plan and execute a transition like you're suggesting. I think this theory is supported by the fact that API access was cut with no notice, the ToS was only changed after-the-fact, and some smaller apps - like Twitterific for MacOS - were initially missed.

MBCook 4y ago

“Starting Feb 1st using a third part client will require Twitter Blue.” That’s all it would have taken. Probably would have made a huge increase in subscribers too. This is 100% a control move. He wants full control over how everyone experiences Twitter (not sure why). So this was pulled. Of course you can NEVER go back from this move.

redox99 4y ago
That's actually a really good idea
- justinclift 4y ago
  If they did some kind of revenue share (from Twitter Blue) with the third party clients their users are using, it might even provide useful funding for some of the otherwise non-commercial ones.
  - r00fus 4y ago
    Twitter could think of this as a kind of lead-generation / user retention system. Of course, Blue is essentially a bandaid of $8/mo/user over the gaping chest would that is the cost of the leveraged buyout ($13B) so I doubt Musk would consider tearing of pieces of that bandaid for goodwill or lead gen.
breput 4y ago
I can't say I totally saw this coming, but when Elon started talking about the WeChat/Everything App/X, the writing was on the all for 3rd party clients. Still, a very shortsighted move.
- justinclift 4y ago
  Wouldn't a WeChat type of approach mean encouraging third party clients/integrations/etc?
  - 4y ago

dawnerd 4y ago

Plus didn't the apps have to pay for api access? I know there was some contention around that when the push notification api changed.

ceejayoz 4y ago
No, that was for firehose access when Twitter bought Gnip. There was a big fuss over third-party clients being limited to 100k users. Twitter fairly quickly walked back that limit (with additional verification and rules specific to clients reaching that size being required).

jdminhbg 4y ago

Twitter had a decade to implement something simple like this and didn't. I assume that there are technical reasons that it's hard to do with their codebase and it's simply not worth the time and money to do so.

pornel 4y ago
Ads come with tracking, so there's probably an issue of trusting all the data that apps would have to send back. Twitter would have to document just how much tracking their ads require, and 3rd party developers could balk at it and cause a stink. OTOH the first party app can track as much as it wants and it'll fly under the radar.
- dwaite 4y ago
  > OTOH the first party app can track as much as it wants and it'll fly under the radar. Until you get caught, and Apple/Google decide to boot the official app from the stores (if) you broke the respective agreements.
  - jdminhbg 4y ago
    I think there’s a pretty wide delta between tracking that is against App Store rules and tracking that would be controversial when written up on the Twitterific/Tweetbot blogs.

vlunkr 4y ago

They could change the TOS, but actually enforcing would be difficult. You'd have to have something like the app store review process. And another goal here is probably to get everyone using the same clients so they have more control over the experience.

justapassenger 4y ago

Because Musk shoots from the hip all the time. And he’s always smartest person in the room.

kemayo 4y ago

The absence of ad-tweets inserted into the API feed with an API term of "you must display these or we'll ban your app" was always weird. That said, I bet that the real thing they want is the control to be able to push the Twitter Blue premium features, which I'm sure third-party apps would just sideline as much as possible even if they made them all available through the API.

linuxftw 4y ago

How could they actually enforce that? That'd need to review every app, constantly.

robryan 4y ago

The other weird thing is why only some 3rd party clients, was it the big ones that got cut? Harpy which I use seems to be working fine.

evan_ 4y ago

(speculation) they want to push everyone to use the official app so they can get as much user info as possible to sell. They want persistent location and all the other juicy stuff you can't get if a third party is standing in the way.