3 ms·
Maybe because very few people have even heard of this, much less used it?
by progrus 4y ago
Maybe because very few people have even heard of this, much less used it?
- viraptor 4y agoThat's irrelevant. You don't kill a service like that without a public deprecation plan and a lot of communication. Both users and services that relied on it need time to migrate.
- spicyramen_ 4y agoThis is what normal enterprise facing business do, is really unacceptable that Twitter did that without notice, we normally go through a legal and communication process before we turn off the lights
- dylan604 4y agoI don't know about that. I've seen enough websites that have specifically removed social logins, so it appears that there is an awareness that the feature was "strings attached" kind of thing. And no, these are all tech oriented sites I've seen this on either.
- progrus 4y ago[flagged]
- SanjayMehta 4y agoYes. It was a DIY repair website and a few months later they gave it up. Can't remember the name. ifixit had sso via yahoo et al as well and one day it just broke.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- riffraff 4y agoYes, a bunch of times. It's on the advent of code website for example, which is pretty popular.
- charcircuit 4y agoYes, there are a lot of Japanese sites that use it.
- yakaccount4 4y agoMy gawker account used it.
- whateveracct 4y agoI guarantee there are at least thousands of people who rely on this. That's a lot of people's lives.
- wink 4y agoEven as someone who likes unique logins with email and usernames, I just double checked my Github account and I've used that to log in to 6 sites. As I finally deactivated my Twitter account last week and didn't check... I'm 9)% I didn't use "Login with Twitter", but I can't say for sure. If some site would only provide Login via Google or Twitter I may have. Probably nothing important, and I will find out sooner or later if I need to recover.
- illiarian 4y agoAt Twitter's scale "very few" means "a couple million"