But first, there needs to be another city-state.
It's not right but it is what it is. I think it's better to accept this now rather than have to deal with our denial later.
Edit: I mentioned they could cut off all functionality. That was hyperbole obviously but they can cut off access to a hefty chunk of the API and replace what third parties are doing nonetheless.
Facebook? I'm unsure if Twitter's userbase is as married to the 140-char limit as Twitter thinks they are.
Maybe the elite who are willing to pay will migrate to app.net, but even if they do they're going to be set apart from people who don't want to pay $50, which means that even if I do sign up for app.net, I'm also going to have to keep my Twitter account.
See also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creeping_normalcy and all the related concepts, eg boiling the frog etc.
IE needs more actual examples, instead of metaphors that turn out to be completely wrong in practice.
EDIT: since I'm getting downvoted because some of you don't agree:
There's like 140M active Twitter users (as of March 2012) and like, 30 clients (guesstimating). If I assume there's like 1M developers on Twitter (which I don't think it is), this feature is still useful to less than 1% of their user base. Not exactly a "must have" feature IMHO.
Although the rollout is slow, it's the ultimate solution for twitter because it does provide a better experience. For those kinds of apps at least.
It's doubtful that many of these apps offer any functionality that could qualify them as a client.
But hey, I suppose it's easier to say we don't understand your point to the degree necessary to agree with it, than it is to suspect a fundamental flaw in your own reasoning.
Seeing if it was published from Twitter for Blackberry, Tweetbot for Mac or EventualTweet tells me a lot about yourself as a person (and believe me, stuff like this makes/breaks relationships).
I personally don't like the idea of via on any service. Unless it is an automated message then in that case it should be flagged as a computer generated message.
Please - this is not about hacking, this is not about technology, this is not even about entrepreneurship - I would really love stories about twitter's opensource projects, twitter's technology choice, twitter's software development methodologies, twitter's devels' thoughts about samsung-apple case. But this is not news worthy. At least not news worthy for Hacker News.
This kind of comment.
Why on earth should I care what some anonymous person thinks is newsworthy? You've got a counter right there showing you exactly how many people find it worth reading.
If it's interesting, read it and/or comment. If it's not, scroll past. Flag if you want. But the only thing less newsworthy than a given story is your assessment of its newsworthiness.
This story has 97 point at time of my writing, 44 comments. It's top story. Learning C with gdb story has 297 points, 80 comments and it's on third row.
Call me crazy, but hasn't this always been the case? Relying on an API out of your control is fine if you're running a website, but if you have a business and you rely on the Twitter's and the Facebook's of the world to keep you going then it's only a matter of time.
I understand the risks. Hell, I'm even taking them with my own project, but I always hoped if you add value to the API owner and that they created the API to give more value to their users why would they company cut you off?
As in all business there are risks. No company have every parameter under control. Building a business off other companies API is one of those risk variables I'm willing to take.
However, Twitter is quite clearly telling us that it's not a risk worth taking anymore.
Sorry, but it is. It's a masterclass in how to do a bait and switch. Start out completely open, let open developers build your community, then shut them all off once you don't need them any more.
At some level consider it is? (1) symbolic the evolution of strategy; or (2) its part of a larger narrative on openess vs trusworthiness; or even (3) its might ve PR issue.ETC.
Also, its always interesting to look back and put this in context: like this http://dashes.com/anil/2009/12/the-twitter-api-is-finished.h...
I liked to know when folks were live tweeting versus time delayed tweeting as it gave me context. If they were live, I'd respond. If they weren't I'd just consumer the content (if interested) and move on.
So what now? Status.net hasn't gained traction, and it's obviously too early to say anything about tent.io, but I am very, very hopeful that eventually a new open, decentralized platform/protocol will emerge as the next-generation social communications platform to replace both Twitter and Facebook simultaneously.
Twitter needs to shit or get off the pot. Either they want a nice big ecosystem and they make money by leveraging their ridiculous amount of 3rd-party traffic, or they listen to the biz dev guys with their nice haircuts and just force all traffic through their official points. It's so wishy-washy, with the Tweetbot Alpha token pull, and this it's very clear they're saying this is the new way but through so many layers of subtext it's like reading a management presentation on blue-sky thinking.
I don't think they'll charge for anything. Doing so would relegate them to the same, minuscule potential user base as App.net has.