4 ms·

From the comments that Musk has made over the last few months, this appears to be as intended. He doesn't seem to view the API as a benefit to the company nor

From the comments that Musk has made over the last few months, this appears to be as intended. He doesn't seem to view the API as a benefit to the company nor a fit for his plans on where he wants to go with it.

MuffinFlavored 4y ago
sounds like a hard job to quantify "can/does maintaining the API make the company money" on one hand you've got a knee-jerk answer: "absolutely! how could it not?!" on the other... maybe he's getting rid of it for a reason? sucks for people who integrated against it but is it is "right" to effectively screw these people over who aren't paying for (but are benefitting from) the API? maybe give them the option to pay?
- sangnoir 4y ago
  > maybe he's getting rid of it for a reason? Probably, but is it a good reason? IMO, he lost the benefit of doubt many decisions ago.
- sleepybrett 4y ago
  If there is an api someone can, and has, written a client that makes twitter work better. You can subvert most the dumb shit they keep trying to throw into the experience that ruin the user experience. Ad's... don't show them, timeline... put it in order, etc. Also there is a small community of researchers out there that use the api to detect botnets, follow networks, etc. Can't have that with musk around.
  - throwaway50607 4y ago
    > Ad's... don't show them, timeline... put it in order, etc. People doing that are probably why they're deprecating the API.
    - sleepybrett 4y ago
      They never put ads into the API actually.
  - anigbrowl 4y ago
    I'm part of that small community. It's a pain in the ass, but I guess I'm just going to get better at asynchronous scraping.
alexpotato 4y ago
This makes sense given that: - Elon has stated that bots are a problem for Twitter - Bots were most likely largely operated via the API. Or at a minimum, used the API as a data source for targeting and crafting of tweets. - If not the API, then using web based automation tools Therefore, if you want to drastically reduce the number of bots you should: 1. Remove the API free tier and/or drastically reduce the feature set of the paid tier 2. Raise the cost of tweet creation e.g. Twitter Blue and paid verification
- majormajor 4y ago
  Yeah, operating a free service and "limiting bots and fake accounts" are pretty incompatible. I didn't think "I'm going to fix bots" meant "I'm going to really limit free access" but it's a coherent approach, at least. I just don't think a paid Twitter will be as valuable as it was. Competing with free is really hard; I'm not sure Mastodon is that competitor, but I bet there will be something.
- fleetwoodsnack 4y ago
  It makes sense if we assume that the API’s change in performance was deliberate.
- gpm 4y ago
  > - Bots were most likely largely operated via the AP This strikes me as extremely unlikely. The bots being discussed were attempting to pretend not to be bots, and there were active attempts to detect and remove them. Using the API would have made it trivial to detect them.
- csb6 4y ago
  The plan doesn’t make much sense because the free tier is write-only. Bots can post 1,500 Tweets per API token per month, but free users can no longer make simple read-only queries about Tweets or users. This means the free API is only useful for people who want to post Tweets automatically (e.g. bots) and not people who just want read-only access and do not contribute to spam. These users will now have to resort to web scraping, which is much more expensive for Twitter to serve than basic JSON API responses.
dragontamer 4y ago
Be that what it may, the Twitter API was making like $400 Million/year revenue for Twitter. So Musk has destroyed Advertising Revenue, and now Twitter API revenue. Is he really trying to make money from just blue check marks alone?
- metalliqaz 4y ago
  But it's potential for dark-money income from the Saudis and Russia has never been higher!

MuffinFlavored 4y ago

sounds like a hard job to quantify "can/does maintaining the API make the company money" on one hand you've got a knee-jerk answer: "absolutely! how could it not?!" on the other... maybe he's getting rid of it for a reason? sucks for people who integrated against it but is it is "right" to effectively screw these people over who aren't paying for (but are benefitting from) the API? maybe give them the option to pay?

sangnoir 4y ago
> maybe he's getting rid of it for a reason? Probably, but is it a good reason? IMO, he lost the benefit of doubt many decisions ago.
sleepybrett 4y ago
If there is an api someone can, and has, written a client that makes twitter work better. You can subvert most the dumb shit they keep trying to throw into the experience that ruin the user experience. Ad's... don't show them, timeline... put it in order, etc. Also there is a small community of researchers out there that use the api to detect botnets, follow networks, etc. Can't have that with musk around.
- throwaway50607 4y ago
  > Ad's... don't show them, timeline... put it in order, etc. People doing that are probably why they're deprecating the API.
  - sleepybrett 4y ago
    They never put ads into the API actually.
- anigbrowl 4y ago
  I'm part of that small community. It's a pain in the ass, but I guess I'm just going to get better at asynchronous scraping.

alexpotato 4y ago

This makes sense given that: - Elon has stated that bots are a problem for Twitter - Bots were most likely largely operated via the API. Or at a minimum, used the API as a data source for targeting and crafting of tweets. - If not the API, then using web based automation tools Therefore, if you want to drastically reduce the number of bots you should: 1. Remove the API free tier and/or drastically reduce the feature set of the paid tier 2. Raise the cost of tweet creation e.g. Twitter Blue and paid verification

majormajor 4y ago
Yeah, operating a free service and "limiting bots and fake accounts" are pretty incompatible. I didn't think "I'm going to fix bots" meant "I'm going to really limit free access" but it's a coherent approach, at least. I just don't think a paid Twitter will be as valuable as it was. Competing with free is really hard; I'm not sure Mastodon is that competitor, but I bet there will be something.
fleetwoodsnack 4y ago
It makes sense if we assume that the API’s change in performance was deliberate.
gpm 4y ago
> - Bots were most likely largely operated via the AP This strikes me as extremely unlikely. The bots being discussed were attempting to pretend not to be bots, and there were active attempts to detect and remove them. Using the API would have made it trivial to detect them.
csb6 4y ago
The plan doesn’t make much sense because the free tier is write-only. Bots can post 1,500 Tweets per API token per month, but free users can no longer make simple read-only queries about Tweets or users. This means the free API is only useful for people who want to post Tweets automatically (e.g. bots) and not people who just want read-only access and do not contribute to spam. These users will now have to resort to web scraping, which is much more expensive for Twitter to serve than basic JSON API responses.

dragontamer 4y ago

Be that what it may, the Twitter API was making like $400 Million/year revenue for Twitter. So Musk has destroyed Advertising Revenue, and now Twitter API revenue. Is he really trying to make money from just blue check marks alone?

metalliqaz 4y ago
But it's potential for dark-money income from the Saudis and Russia has never been higher!