Hacker News Reader

Comment by kjackson2012 | Hacker News Reader

kjackson2012

In another era, maybe 5+ years ago, any API provider that had such draconian service terms such as Twitter would have been promptly dropped by most API developers.

Why do people continue to develop to Twitter's API? It's obvious that Twitter doesn't want people to use their API. In my years of developing on top of 3rd party APIs from Microsoft, Oracle, etc, I've never seen such contempt for developers as I see from Twitter and Facebook. Developers should abandon Twitter en masse.

But they don't. Developers keep using the Twitter API and they keep getting shut down after spending significant time developing their app. Fool me once, shame on them, fool me twice, shame on me.

I think developers keep doing it because they are still hoping for that one app that will get them acqu-hired by Twitter or Facebook, so that they can become fabulously rich. It's the one big difference between now and 5+ years ago, and especially before the Instagram acquisition.

View on HN

Your comment is so filter bubbled that it hurts.

People keep developing against the Twitter and Facebook APIs because that's where the users are.

Why does it matter how many users there are if you aren't allowed to make money off of them?

Twitter is far worse than FB in this regard. Unless you can figure out a way to generate revenue by putting content into the stream (eg content publishers), Twitter is not a good place to build a business.

Unless you expect Twitter to sue you, "not allowed to" is pure ideology. In reality, you make money until they notice you, then walk away.

For a side-project, that is great. But if you are building a company where you have multiple people looking to you to keep supplying the paycheck that pays their mortgage, that just seems irresponsible.

Notwithstanding that, why would you want to build something that could have the rug pulled out from under it at any point? I build stuff because I enjoy building thing. If it wasn't working in the market and fails, it is my fault, and I can live with that. If it is successful in the market and fails through somebody else's actions (that I should have been cognizant of), that just sucks.

Because the alternative is to build CRUD app startups like Basecamp, with no dependencies on any API or 3rd party data. Useful, no doubt, but a saturated market.

Saying "CRUD application" is like saying "Java application". It's an implementation detail and not an actual feature.

Tumblr is a CRUD application, yet it shares almost nothing with Basecamp.

Focusing on the technology does not make great products.

FWIW, I think there are a lot of potentially interesting applications that could be built on Twitter, but they've proven themselves hostile to the idea. I don't even trust them as an OAuth provider anymore.

Wait did you mean bubble-filtered?

We're not talking about users here; if you're a Twitter developer you are by definition someone who should at least pay passing attention to which way the wind is blowing in tech. If you want to try some ideas out by building against Twitter that's great, but if you are trying to build a business and you don't realize that Twitter is trying very hard to make sure no one makes any money from their platform but them, then you deserve to have your legs cut off when it inevitably happens after months or years of hard work building traction.

With Facebook or Google APIs you can make the argument that's it's worth the risk, but idealogies and diatribes aside, with Twitter you have to go in with your eyes open.

> We're not talking about users here

Yes, we are. Flattr works fine without Twitter. The Twitter connection is "just" a way to get more users. Flattr is not going to go bankrupt because Twitter blocks them (or, at least not as a direct result).

Therefore, in a thread about Flattr (or any other business that uses the Twitter API but does not vitally depend on it), a "devs that still talk to Twitter are stupid" rant is completely misplaced.

Poor choice of words on my part. I meant we're talking about developers making decisions, not users making decisions.

It's a gamble that will pay off if the powers to be deem it to not be a threat. But then the conundrum is why would twitter allow any other company to profit off it's platform?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com