15 ms·

I’m Done Developing for Twitter

294 points by aaronwhite 14y ago

iambot 14y ago
Sad and disheartening. As someone who also hacks together the occasional twitter app/hybrid, I wonder if this sentiment is widespread/growing?
ascendant 14y ago
Twitter gained a lot of popularity on the back of a vibrant third party ecosystem. Now that they're established, it seems that the have deemed those same third party developers a threat and have turned on them. Just another example of why basing your company on someone else's platform is a bad idea.
- ascendant 14y ago
  And as a side note, I'm not berating the guy for doing it. It's just another cautionary tale.
  - aaronwhite 14y ago
    No worries, I don't feel berated. These were hobby projects that people found useful, I have a full-time startup that gets the majority of my attention. So yes, making sure I share yet another cautionary tale. If you read Cappy's comment on my blog there's another excellent cautionary tale in there re FB
- wslh 14y ago
  The problem is: will we have real APIs in the future? because these APIs are a kind of scam.
  - kintamanimatt 14y ago
    Perhaps they should be renamed to SPI - Service Programming Interface. An API somewhat gives the impression of a programming interface that will execute valid instructions unconditionally and reliably. An SPI is different because it can fail, not because of a technical error, but because a human, for grins or otherwise, decided to cause the failure.
  - roguecoder 14y ago
    I think the definition of an "API" should be "can I, if necessary, replace it with my own implementation of the same thing?" If it isn't subject to the Liskov substitution principle it's something different.
neehaha 14y ago
Amateur question here. How does Twitter stop your app? Do they block your IP from accessing their API?
- aaronwhite 14y ago
  In order to interact with their API, you need a security token. They revoke the rights on that token, and the API rejects your requests.
  - rhizome 14y ago
    And to put a finer point on it, tokenized APIs are basically whitelists.
mindcrime 14y ago
Moral of the story: be-wary of developing applications with dependency to a platform Yep. Or at least "be-wary of developing applications with dependency to a platform unless you control it, it's easily replicable, or you have a legally binding SLA in place with the provider." We're seeing more and more of this kind of thing, and people need to realize that you can't build something sustainable by relying on the happenstance goodwill of some arbitrary API provider.
- mbesto 14y ago
  Thank you for this. It's not anecdotal to simply say "don't rely on platforms". Be weary of platforms that are free. They do have risks. It's important to understand those risks before thinking you've just hit a gold mine.
  - genwin 14y ago
    I'd say avoid platforms that lock you in to that vendor, free or not. I've read of paid accounts being shut down just as unceremoniously. Or prices were increased 10X. Even when not locked in, one should be ready enough to move to another vendor without too much problem.
    - incongruity 14y ago
      Well, if you're paying, you should at least have some sort of contractual protection. If you don't, you're just a wallet to them, not a valued customer.
  - mik4el 14y ago
    I totally agree. There are no free lunches and there will be no free lunches. Piggy-backing is fine but it's unsustainable if you don't offer the part you're piggy-backing something in return.
  - incongruity 14y ago
    Personally, I wonder if this sort of pushback will drive us towards a more standards-ish way of approaching platforms where it won't be enough to simply provide an API – to get use, you'll need to make it a more standardized API that provides a more standardized sort of data – because only when we have those sorts of standards can we hope of it being safe to develop based on someone else's free API – because I know if I need to, I can substitute in (or combine) some other data source. Relatedly, Right now, what I think we're seeing is a lack of real competition of direct substitutes. There is nothing exactly substitutable for Twitter quite in the way that products ranging from Heinz Ketchup to the Chevy Malibu face real, direct substitutes, rather than a more abstracted category substitute (i.e. Facebook is similar to Twitter, but it's not a perfect substitute). As such, switching costs are higher and it makes development for a specific platform more risky.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
codgercoder 14y ago
Sadly, I don't think there's any kind of "social contract" with web services providing APIs. Just as the exploitation of crowdsourced data is now common practice (including personal data), most organizations provide APIs only as long as they find free access in their own interest. There's little loyalty or feeling that they owe users anything, at all.
- protomyth 14y ago
  In my most cynical moments, I think the business plan is to provide an API, let it boost your services usage via 3rd party labor, get successful, then buy what you want and lockout the rest.
  - mpclark 14y ago
    That's not in any way cynical; that's business.
    - protomyth 14y ago
      I don't think it is a good long term business plan. I believe you should "dance with the one that brought you". If this is all about advertising or branding, it is just sad and it makes it harder for the people who actually care about their developers.
drivebyacct2 14y ago
>Moral of the story: be-wary of developing applications with dependency to a platform. I've come to the conclusion that this belongs in the category of "Make regular backups" and "Use unique passwords and a password manager". Everyone knows they should, and yet so many people refuse to accept that it could happen to them. I don't know if it's hubris or arrogance. How many times has this lesson been displayed in the last week on HN, let alone the last 4 years. iOS, LinkedIn, Craigslist, Twitter, often Facebook. Not me! My app is too {small, unique, creative} to be a problem.
- Karunamon 14y ago
  Sort of. Writing a program is usually a fun endeavor. Having the platform owner come and stomp on you, regardless of how much right they have to do it, is still a pretty shitty thing to do.
- paulgb 14y ago
  Either people are stupid, or despite a few publicized cases of apps getting shut down, the benefit of being able to build on someone else's API outweighs the risk. It's probably a bit of both.
- mattgreenrocks 14y ago
  The problem is that good data is often tightly locked up.
- michaelt 14y ago
  To be fair, if your application revolves around producing a tweetspam-filtered copy of Twitter's stream of tweets, it's not really possible to make that twitter-independent. Competitors like facebook and google+ don't really have a spam problem.
- legutierr 14y ago
  You list Facebook as being an equal problem for developers. I remember seeing articles on the other four companies you list, but not Facebook. Did I miss something? Honest question: what did I miss?
sequoia 14y ago
Just to play devil's advocate for a moment... The first app created a layer between twitter and its users which meant that stripping ads would be trivial & likely universal (they don't put ads in 3rd party app streams yet but should they chose to this would stop them) and you could be harvesting the analytics and user metainfo that twitter wants to sell for ad-targeting against what they probably consider "their" content. I can see how they would take exception to a service that allows users to fully control their interaction with twitter; it could seem too much like "handing the keys over" to a third party. TweetFavor (ironically) seems that it would worsen the signal to noise ratio that Proxlet aimed to improve. Friends turning themselves into voluntary zombies in a twitter spam botnet? I know it's not actually that bad but I can see why twitter would want to cut this off. None of this excuses the manner with which twitter did what they did, and like I said, "Devil's Advocate," neither of the apps were that bad, but it's not unfathomable to me why twitter would have a problem with them.
- aaronwhite 14y ago
  Proxlet never made any attempt to block ads (they didn't even exist when we built it!) That said, it's really no different than a normal 3rd party app which could do the same thing. Again, my beef was the manner in which they shut it down abruptly stranding users. TweetFavor just supports an existing pattern "hey dude, can you tweet this for me?" And permission had to be given per-tweet request, there was no mass zombification. You'd pledge individual tweets. Once again, no reason as to why it was shut down, and certainly no one used it before making the call.
cletus 14y ago
What surprises me is not that a platform provider will do things in its own interests, it's that people keep falling for it. Seriously. This isn't new eg [1]. Also, I don't really buy into the argument that these third-party providers is what made Twitter popular. IMHO Twitter made Twitter popular and the devs just followed the money. [1]: http://gigaom.com/2011/06/07/fred-wilson-to-devs-expect-platform-owners-to-work-against-you/ http://gigaom.com/2011/06/07/fred-wilson-to-devs-expect-plat...
- kintamanimatt 14y ago
  Perhaps we'll reach the stage where developers react to third party APIs like an abused spouse does to their aggressor -- shying away from their spouse and doing their best to move on to greener pastures. We may end up at the stage where the most successful third party APIs are those that provide strong bilateral agreements and service guarantees, so that the developer doesn't live in fear that the nerdy rug will be unpredictably pulled out from underneath them.
  - roqetman 14y ago
    I wish it were so, but though I hate to be cynical, this has been going on (for me) since the early 90's (back then Microsoft was the one everyone connected to) so I doubt that anything is going to change.
    - kintamanimatt 14y ago
      Maybe it needs to get worse before the tipping point is reached though and API developers start genuinely caring for the wellbeing of their developers and acting with a greater deal of integrity and empathy. Established businesses should feel less secure today as it seems far harder for one business to have a stranglehold on the market. Software distribution costs have been lowered by the internet. Development costs have also been lowered because we no need to push wheelbarrows of cash to Oracle, et al. We have better tools, better infrastructure, and shorter development cycles. Marketing is easier, cheaper, and more apt to give rapid feedback.
kamau 14y ago
They used to say this about Microsoft. http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/07/12/WebsThePlace http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/07/12/WebsThePla... Now it can apply to any company that provides developers an API.
3riverdev 14y ago
A group of us developed an app for published research work that used the streaming API within academia. The amount of hoops we had to jump through for the necessary access was absurd. It's as if the attitude is "it's a privilege for you to use this API", as opposed to making it a viable platform.
yashchandra 14y ago
Exactly the reason why I am so paranoid about third party APIs. I even asked this over a HN post here but did not get much response. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4162370 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4162370
demachina 14y ago
I was kind of hoping Dorsey coming back to Twitter would have put an end to or at least subdued their hostility to their developer community, but it doesn't appear to be the case. Their new proprietary attachments are even more concerning than this. Costolo and Ev are dickish enough you expect crap from them, but Dorsey used to have some hacker cool. I wonder if either Dorsey doesn't have enough power to swing Twitter back to being open and cool again, or if he's drunk the rich and famous Koolaid to the point he just wants to cash out in a big IPO and doesn't care about the things he used to care about. Regrettably companies trying to squeeze enough revenue out of "free" Internet services to have a successful IPO are pretty much compelled to be complete dicks, so its probably gonna happen. It just kind of sucks that Twitter is the absolute coolest news stream there is, there aren't any good replacements and you KNOW they are going to totally wreck it by the time they IPO or within a year of going public and we are going to all have to start over on some new "never heard of" clone. Then repeat cycle endlessly every few years. Dave Winer will keep shouting to use RSS but RSS completely sucks by comparison. As an aside a few days ago I read New Yorker and some other mags were getting weary of letting Flipbook scrape their content and were going to just put a lead in and link users to their main web site through flipbook instead. I'm thinking, wow that's what Twitter was already doing. I totally never understood what Flipbook offered to justify the hype. A good Twitter stream in a good client is infinitely better.
- asto 14y ago
  You should try google+. I like it better than twitter and I use it primarily as a news stream. The only reason I don't use it more regularly is that they don't have a proper API yet and therefore have no apps for my blackberry.
pimentel 14y ago
If you base your app on 3rd party APIs, and charge users for using your app, don't you have any liability in case the API shuts you off? Would a TOS clause with something like "We will not be held responsible if our service providers cease to function. Also no refunds." give any protection?
tibbon 14y ago
Back in 2009, I was doing a lot of social network research with the Web Ecology Project (http://www.webecologyproject.org/ http://www.webecologyproject.org/). Among other things, we captured a 100% set of tweets surrounding the election in Iran in 09, and released a paper on them. It was interesting, because it ended up all being a bit of a precursor to the Arab Spring and many current events in the middle east today. I loved doing it. The API team was responsive, and although we were never able to get full Firehose (despite offerring large amount of money) we were able to easily play with and access a lot of data. Much/all of that has changed. The API has gotten really complex to work with. The terms of service are no longer friendly. Getting whitelisted accounts for standard API calls is impossible, and overall feeling like we have any influence or use to Twitter is dwindling. Whereas at one point I felt it was a joy to work with, now I feel its impossible. Getting the data to study is impossible (or expensive, since a few companies control the firehose), and there's the constant feeling of getting shut down at any moment. Plus, there's just too much data to grab given the clunky methods you have to use to do it. I'd kill for a hard drive of the 'network graph' with diffs over time. As-is, its impossible to answer certain academic questions. To a certain degree, while Twitter is used far more now than in 2009, it feels boring, obvious and less important to me. So at the end of the day, nothing of value was lost, but I do miss it as it was interesting at one point.
bonaldi 14y ago
and today they post this https://dev.twitter.com/blog/delivering-consistent-twitter-experience https://dev.twitter.com/blog/delivering-consistent-twitter-e...
- protomyth 14y ago
  from the link: "for example with branding, and in the coming weeks, we will be introducing stricter guidelines around how the Twitter API is used." They have a vision and it doesn't include 3rd party developers. I think developers were hoping for a universal message bus / directory of users and Twitter wants to be something else.
- rhizome 14y ago
  Yet you'll notice that the only features they mention that people might build upon are all features based upon contributions to Twitter itself, in the form of either content (posting proxies) or analytic data ('like' buttons, embeds). Consumption is left entirely out of the mix.
  - demachina 14y ago
    Yea, they want developers to develop content for them, and they want developers to develop traffic for them. They absolutely dont want developers to develop interesting clients and apps using for their message bus. Their guidelines on displaying tweets are getting so restrictive its pointless to develop anything resembling a client. Twitter has also proved to be spectacularly bad at building clients themselves. I haven't been able to stand any of the many iterations of their web site and their best client efforts were just bought from the 3rd party developer community and then mangled. Twitter should seriously consider just shutting down their API to third party developers and restrict it entirely to their clients and widgets. It would be a lot more intellectually honest thing to do versus just slowly and continuously stangling their developer community in their quest for revenue. If they just shut off the API then everyone would get the kick in the pants they need to move on to something new. The Internet community desperately needs to figure out a way to build an open message bus + identity system + open API + server farm + spam killers using a foundation along the lines of Wikipedia. Letting one for profit company control the Internet's message bus has proven to be a truly horrible idea. Going back to RSS and a totally decentralized system not good either.
apievangelist 14y ago
What Twitter is doing is extremely damaging to developers and the perception of APIs. But let's not bundle all APIs as terrible. The Twilio's, Stripe's and other progressive APIs know how to treat devs and respect them. We just need to make sure we are equally vocal about the good and the bad in the space.
- jbigelow76 14y ago
  The difference between Twitter and Twilio or Stripe is that Twitter has a product that exists outside their API. In the case of Stripe or Twilio their API is their product, the dynamic between developers and the Twitter vs. Twilio is going to be far different.
  - apievangelist 14y ago
    Agreed, but this distinction isn't made when bashing API opportunities. The haters on this thread and others state developers are fools for depending on APIs...not just APIs who have products that exist outside their APIs.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
teeja 14y ago
While you're at it, never commit your data to any proprietary application. There, that's what 40 years taught me.
roguecoder 14y ago
This is why open source triumphs in platform spaces: if your business relies on another company's intellectual property it can be destroyed at any time.
bobx11 14y ago
A company you did not pay and do not help generate revenue (doesn't one of them actually reduce ad impressions?) arbitrarily disconnected you from using their server resources? Crazy talk...
- ivankirigin 14y ago
  > do not help generate revenue That isn't true. API apps drive engagement which helps retention to grow their platform.
treelovinhippie 14y ago
Not to mention the insanely low rate limits...
sodelate 14y ago
i'm done developing for SHINE
nnnnni 14y ago
That is a horrible domain name. It's almost as bad as Experts Exchange before they hyphenated it...

294 points by aaronwhite 14y ago

Sad and disheartening. As someone who also hacks together the occasional twitter app/hybrid, I wonder if this sentiment is widespread/growing?

ascendant 14y ago

Twitter gained a lot of popularity on the back of a vibrant third party ecosystem. Now that they're established, it seems that the have deemed those same third party developers a threat and have turned on them. Just another example of why basing your company on someone else's platform is a bad idea.

ascendant 14y ago
And as a side note, I'm not berating the guy for doing it. It's just another cautionary tale.
- aaronwhite 14y ago
  No worries, I don't feel berated. These were hobby projects that people found useful, I have a full-time startup that gets the majority of my attention. So yes, making sure I share yet another cautionary tale. If you read Cappy's comment on my blog there's another excellent cautionary tale in there re FB
wslh 14y ago
The problem is: will we have real APIs in the future? because these APIs are a kind of scam.
- kintamanimatt 14y ago
  Perhaps they should be renamed to SPI - Service Programming Interface. An API somewhat gives the impression of a programming interface that will execute valid instructions unconditionally and reliably. An SPI is different because it can fail, not because of a technical error, but because a human, for grins or otherwise, decided to cause the failure.
- roguecoder 14y ago
  I think the definition of an "API" should be "can I, if necessary, replace it with my own implementation of the same thing?" If it isn't subject to the Liskov substitution principle it's something different.

neehaha 14y ago

Amateur question here. How does Twitter stop your app? Do they block your IP from accessing their API?

aaronwhite 14y ago
In order to interact with their API, you need a security token. They revoke the rights on that token, and the API rejects your requests.
- rhizome 14y ago
  And to put a finer point on it, tokenized APIs are basically whitelists.

mindcrime 14y ago

Moral of the story: be-wary of developing applications with dependency to a platform Yep. Or at least "be-wary of developing applications with dependency to a platform unless you control it, it's easily replicable, or you have a legally binding SLA in place with the provider." We're seeing more and more of this kind of thing, and people need to realize that you can't build something sustainable by relying on the happenstance goodwill of some arbitrary API provider.

mbesto 14y ago
Thank you for this. It's not anecdotal to simply say "don't rely on platforms". Be weary of platforms that are free. They do have risks. It's important to understand those risks before thinking you've just hit a gold mine.
- genwin 14y ago
  I'd say avoid platforms that lock you in to that vendor, free or not. I've read of paid accounts being shut down just as unceremoniously. Or prices were increased 10X. Even when not locked in, one should be ready enough to move to another vendor without too much problem.
  - incongruity 14y ago
    Well, if you're paying, you should at least have some sort of contractual protection. If you don't, you're just a wallet to them, not a valued customer.
- mik4el 14y ago
  I totally agree. There are no free lunches and there will be no free lunches. Piggy-backing is fine but it's unsustainable if you don't offer the part you're piggy-backing something in return.
- incongruity 14y ago
  Personally, I wonder if this sort of pushback will drive us towards a more standards-ish way of approaching platforms where it won't be enough to simply provide an API – to get use, you'll need to make it a more standardized API that provides a more standardized sort of data – because only when we have those sorts of standards can we hope of it being safe to develop based on someone else's free API – because I know if I need to, I can substitute in (or combine) some other data source. Relatedly, Right now, what I think we're seeing is a lack of real competition of direct substitutes. There is nothing exactly substitutable for Twitter quite in the way that products ranging from Heinz Ketchup to the Chevy Malibu face real, direct substitutes, rather than a more abstracted category substitute (i.e. Facebook is similar to Twitter, but it's not a perfect substitute). As such, switching costs are higher and it makes development for a specific platform more risky.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

codgercoder 14y ago

Sadly, I don't think there's any kind of "social contract" with web services providing APIs. Just as the exploitation of crowdsourced data is now common practice (including personal data), most organizations provide APIs only as long as they find free access in their own interest. There's little loyalty or feeling that they owe users anything, at all.

protomyth 14y ago
In my most cynical moments, I think the business plan is to provide an API, let it boost your services usage via 3rd party labor, get successful, then buy what you want and lockout the rest.
- mpclark 14y ago
  That's not in any way cynical; that's business.
  - protomyth 14y ago
    I don't think it is a good long term business plan. I believe you should "dance with the one that brought you". If this is all about advertising or branding, it is just sad and it makes it harder for the people who actually care about their developers.

drivebyacct2 14y ago

>Moral of the story: be-wary of developing applications with dependency to a platform. I've come to the conclusion that this belongs in the category of "Make regular backups" and "Use unique passwords and a password manager". Everyone knows they should, and yet so many people refuse to accept that it could happen to them. I don't know if it's hubris or arrogance. How many times has this lesson been displayed in the last week on HN, let alone the last 4 years. iOS, LinkedIn, Craigslist, Twitter, often Facebook. Not me! My app is too {small, unique, creative} to be a problem.

Karunamon 14y ago
Sort of. Writing a program is usually a fun endeavor. Having the platform owner come and stomp on you, regardless of how much right they have to do it, is still a pretty shitty thing to do.
paulgb 14y ago
Either people are stupid, or despite a few publicized cases of apps getting shut down, the benefit of being able to build on someone else's API outweighs the risk. It's probably a bit of both.
mattgreenrocks 14y ago
The problem is that good data is often tightly locked up.
michaelt 14y ago
To be fair, if your application revolves around producing a tweetspam-filtered copy of Twitter's stream of tweets, it's not really possible to make that twitter-independent. Competitors like facebook and google+ don't really have a spam problem.
legutierr 14y ago
You list Facebook as being an equal problem for developers. I remember seeing articles on the other four companies you list, but not Facebook. Did I miss something? Honest question: what did I miss?

sequoia 14y ago

Just to play devil's advocate for a moment... The first app created a layer between twitter and its users which meant that stripping ads would be trivial & likely universal (they don't put ads in 3rd party app streams yet but should they chose to this would stop them) and you could be harvesting the analytics and user metainfo that twitter wants to sell for ad-targeting against what they probably consider "their" content. I can see how they would take exception to a service that allows users to fully control their interaction with twitter; it could seem too much like "handing the keys over" to a third party. TweetFavor (ironically) seems that it would worsen the signal to noise ratio that Proxlet aimed to improve. Friends turning themselves into voluntary zombies in a twitter spam botnet? I know it's not actually that bad but I can see why twitter would want to cut this off. None of this excuses the manner with which twitter did what they did, and like I said, "Devil's Advocate," neither of the apps were that bad, but it's not unfathomable to me why twitter would have a problem with them.

aaronwhite 14y ago
Proxlet never made any attempt to block ads (they didn't even exist when we built it!) That said, it's really no different than a normal 3rd party app which could do the same thing. Again, my beef was the manner in which they shut it down abruptly stranding users. TweetFavor just supports an existing pattern "hey dude, can you tweet this for me?" And permission had to be given per-tweet request, there was no mass zombification. You'd pledge individual tweets. Once again, no reason as to why it was shut down, and certainly no one used it before making the call.

cletus 14y ago

What surprises me is not that a platform provider will do things in its own interests, it's that people keep falling for it. Seriously. This isn't new eg [1]. Also, I don't really buy into the argument that these third-party providers is what made Twitter popular. IMHO Twitter made Twitter popular and the devs just followed the money. [1]: http://gigaom.com/2011/06/07/fred-wilson-to-devs-expect-platform-owners-to-work-against-you/ http://gigaom.com/2011/06/07/fred-wilson-to-devs-expect-plat...

kintamanimatt 14y ago
Perhaps we'll reach the stage where developers react to third party APIs like an abused spouse does to their aggressor -- shying away from their spouse and doing their best to move on to greener pastures. We may end up at the stage where the most successful third party APIs are those that provide strong bilateral agreements and service guarantees, so that the developer doesn't live in fear that the nerdy rug will be unpredictably pulled out from underneath them.
- roqetman 14y ago
  I wish it were so, but though I hate to be cynical, this has been going on (for me) since the early 90's (back then Microsoft was the one everyone connected to) so I doubt that anything is going to change.
  - kintamanimatt 14y ago
    Maybe it needs to get worse before the tipping point is reached though and API developers start genuinely caring for the wellbeing of their developers and acting with a greater deal of integrity and empathy. Established businesses should feel less secure today as it seems far harder for one business to have a stranglehold on the market. Software distribution costs have been lowered by the internet. Development costs have also been lowered because we no need to push wheelbarrows of cash to Oracle, et al. We have better tools, better infrastructure, and shorter development cycles. Marketing is easier, cheaper, and more apt to give rapid feedback.

kamau 14y ago

They used to say this about Microsoft. http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/07/12/WebsThePlace http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/07/12/WebsThePla... Now it can apply to any company that provides developers an API.

3riverdev 14y ago

A group of us developed an app for published research work that used the streaming API within academia. The amount of hoops we had to jump through for the necessary access was absurd. It's as if the attitude is "it's a privilege for you to use this API", as opposed to making it a viable platform.

yashchandra 14y ago

Exactly the reason why I am so paranoid about third party APIs. I even asked this over a HN post here but did not get much response. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4162370 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4162370

demachina 14y ago

I was kind of hoping Dorsey coming back to Twitter would have put an end to or at least subdued their hostility to their developer community, but it doesn't appear to be the case. Their new proprietary attachments are even more concerning than this. Costolo and Ev are dickish enough you expect crap from them, but Dorsey used to have some hacker cool. I wonder if either Dorsey doesn't have enough power to swing Twitter back to being open and cool again, or if he's drunk the rich and famous Koolaid to the point he just wants to cash out in a big IPO and doesn't care about the things he used to care about. Regrettably companies trying to squeeze enough revenue out of "free" Internet services to have a successful IPO are pretty much compelled to be complete dicks, so its probably gonna happen. It just kind of sucks that Twitter is the absolute coolest news stream there is, there aren't any good replacements and you KNOW they are going to totally wreck it by the time they IPO or within a year of going public and we are going to all have to start over on some new "never heard of" clone. Then repeat cycle endlessly every few years. Dave Winer will keep shouting to use RSS but RSS completely sucks by comparison. As an aside a few days ago I read New Yorker and some other mags were getting weary of letting Flipbook scrape their content and were going to just put a lead in and link users to their main web site through flipbook instead. I'm thinking, wow that's what Twitter was already doing. I totally never understood what Flipbook offered to justify the hype. A good Twitter stream in a good client is infinitely better.

asto 14y ago
You should try google+. I like it better than twitter and I use it primarily as a news stream. The only reason I don't use it more regularly is that they don't have a proper API yet and therefore have no apps for my blackberry.

pimentel 14y ago

If you base your app on 3rd party APIs, and charge users for using your app, don't you have any liability in case the API shuts you off? Would a TOS clause with something like "We will not be held responsible if our service providers cease to function. Also no refunds." give any protection?

tibbon 14y ago

Back in 2009, I was doing a lot of social network research with the Web Ecology Project (http://www.webecologyproject.org/ http://www.webecologyproject.org/). Among other things, we captured a 100% set of tweets surrounding the election in Iran in 09, and released a paper on them. It was interesting, because it ended up all being a bit of a precursor to the Arab Spring and many current events in the middle east today. I loved doing it. The API team was responsive, and although we were never able to get full Firehose (despite offerring large amount of money) we were able to easily play with and access a lot of data. Much/all of that has changed. The API has gotten really complex to work with. The terms of service are no longer friendly. Getting whitelisted accounts for standard API calls is impossible, and overall feeling like we have any influence or use to Twitter is dwindling. Whereas at one point I felt it was a joy to work with, now I feel its impossible. Getting the data to study is impossible (or expensive, since a few companies control the firehose), and there's the constant feeling of getting shut down at any moment. Plus, there's just too much data to grab given the clunky methods you have to use to do it. I'd kill for a hard drive of the 'network graph' with diffs over time. As-is, its impossible to answer certain academic questions. To a certain degree, while Twitter is used far more now than in 2009, it feels boring, obvious and less important to me. So at the end of the day, nothing of value was lost, but I do miss it as it was interesting at one point.

bonaldi 14y ago

and today they post this https://dev.twitter.com/blog/delivering-consistent-twitter-experience https://dev.twitter.com/blog/delivering-consistent-twitter-e...

protomyth 14y ago
from the link: "for example with branding, and in the coming weeks, we will be introducing stricter guidelines around how the Twitter API is used." They have a vision and it doesn't include 3rd party developers. I think developers were hoping for a universal message bus / directory of users and Twitter wants to be something else.
rhizome 14y ago
Yet you'll notice that the only features they mention that people might build upon are all features based upon contributions to Twitter itself, in the form of either content (posting proxies) or analytic data ('like' buttons, embeds). Consumption is left entirely out of the mix.
- demachina 14y ago
  Yea, they want developers to develop content for them, and they want developers to develop traffic for them. They absolutely dont want developers to develop interesting clients and apps using for their message bus. Their guidelines on displaying tweets are getting so restrictive its pointless to develop anything resembling a client. Twitter has also proved to be spectacularly bad at building clients themselves. I haven't been able to stand any of the many iterations of their web site and their best client efforts were just bought from the 3rd party developer community and then mangled. Twitter should seriously consider just shutting down their API to third party developers and restrict it entirely to their clients and widgets. It would be a lot more intellectually honest thing to do versus just slowly and continuously stangling their developer community in their quest for revenue. If they just shut off the API then everyone would get the kick in the pants they need to move on to something new. The Internet community desperately needs to figure out a way to build an open message bus + identity system + open API + server farm + spam killers using a foundation along the lines of Wikipedia. Letting one for profit company control the Internet's message bus has proven to be a truly horrible idea. Going back to RSS and a totally decentralized system not good either.

apievangelist 14y ago

What Twitter is doing is extremely damaging to developers and the perception of APIs. But let's not bundle all APIs as terrible. The Twilio's, Stripe's and other progressive APIs know how to treat devs and respect them. We just need to make sure we are equally vocal about the good and the bad in the space.

jbigelow76 14y ago
The difference between Twitter and Twilio or Stripe is that Twitter has a product that exists outside their API. In the case of Stripe or Twilio their API is their product, the dynamic between developers and the Twitter vs. Twilio is going to be far different.
- apievangelist 14y ago
  Agreed, but this distinction isn't made when bashing API opportunities. The haters on this thread and others state developers are fools for depending on APIs...not just APIs who have products that exist outside their APIs.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

teeja 14y ago

While you're at it, never commit your data to any proprietary application. There, that's what 40 years taught me.

roguecoder 14y ago

This is why open source triumphs in platform spaces: if your business relies on another company's intellectual property it can be destroyed at any time.

bobx11 14y ago

A company you did not pay and do not help generate revenue (doesn't one of them actually reduce ad impressions?) arbitrarily disconnected you from using their server resources? Crazy talk...

ivankirigin 14y ago
> do not help generate revenue That isn't true. API apps drive engagement which helps retention to grow their platform.

treelovinhippie 14y ago

Not to mention the insanely low rate limits...

sodelate 14y ago

i'm done developing for SHINE

nnnnni 14y ago

That is a horrible domain name. It's almost as bad as Experts Exchange before they hyphenated it...