Elon Musk deliberately turned off access of outside apps to Twitter(theinformation.com)
theinformation.com
Elon Musk deliberately turned off access of outside apps to Twitter
https://www.theinformation.com/articles/musks-twitter-intentionally-suspended-tweet-bot-third-party-apps-messages-show
39 comments
Can I get my own razor for "If one of the possible answers is Elon is being an idiot, that's probably it."
Henceforth known as Netsharc’s Razor
:D
:D
Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity, now amended by If it could have been malice or stupidity, first make sure it wasn't Elon Musk
It's worth noting that this doesn't just kill "competitive" (and often far better) clients, which would be bizarre enough. This nukes general ecosystem integration, effectively decapitating Twitter as a "surface" for marketing, advertising, communications, and support systems. If advertisers were on the fence before, they will no longer be once they find out that Twitter has intentionally burned its bridges with marketing automation tools.
Kind of - it appears only a few (high volume?) third party apps have been disabled. For example, Twitterific iOS app is dead, but the Mac app is still working.
If I had to guess, I'd say that Twitter went down a list of the most active API keys and deactivated all of the third-party clients they saw -- so some of the less popular clients might have avoided the cut by being less popular. They wouldn't want to disable all API keys, since that would mean losing a lot of automated accounts which drive engagement, like blogs and news agencies.
but doing this with zero prior notice is a big middle finger to all these people who have been compliantly building on these apis and perhaps even paying them for years
Absolutely. No disagreement there.
I'm just speculating as to how Twitter could have ended up disabling API keys for most of the popular third-party clients, while leaving some of the more niche clients active.
I'm just speculating as to how Twitter could have ended up disabling API keys for most of the popular third-party clients, while leaving some of the more niche clients active.
Thanks! I can't see beyond the introductory paragraph, which makes it sound like all third-party access has been intentionally suspended.
I do wonder if that will happen. But they clearly targeted the top apps.
For example I thought it was very odd that Movetodon kept working when TweetBot stopped.
But if they targeted user counts it would fit.
For example I thought it was very odd that Movetodon kept working when TweetBot stopped.
But if they targeted user counts it would fit.
9to5google:
https://9to5google.com/2023/01/14/twitter-third-party-app-in...
>
According to The Information today, a senior Twitter engineer internally communicated this week that the “Third-party app suspensions are intentional.” Other internal (Slack) communications seen by the publication reveal that Twitter is working on “approved talking points” for partners, but it’s not clear when they would be ready. That “3party clients revoked access” exchange occurred on Friday morning, and it’s unclear whether that information is for impacted third-party developers or advertisers.
https://9to5google.com/2023/01/14/twitter-third-party-app-in...
>
According to The Information today, a senior Twitter engineer internally communicated this week that the “Third-party app suspensions are intentional.” Other internal (Slack) communications seen by the publication reveal that Twitter is working on “approved talking points” for partners, but it’s not clear when they would be ready. That “3party clients revoked access” exchange occurred on Friday morning, and it’s unclear whether that information is for impacted third-party developers or advertisers.
The other big quote in The Information's reporting:
“A Twitter employee […] asked when employees could expect a list of ‘approved talking points’ for questions from partners related to ‘3party clients revoked access.’ A product marketing manager responded that the company had ‘started to work on comms’.”
Shoot first, talk later.
“A Twitter employee […] asked when employees could expect a list of ‘approved talking points’ for questions from partners related to ‘3party clients revoked access.’ A product marketing manager responded that the company had ‘started to work on comms’.”
Shoot first, talk later.
The sad thing is there’s tons of people who use those apps who still like Twitter. And if they had announced that it was being cut off on February 1 for anyone who wasn’t a Twitter blue subscriber, they probably could’ve gotten a ton more subscribers. I’ve had for years I would be happy to subscribe if that was what it would take to be able to keep using a third-party client, and the third party client could actually do all the features like editing and polls.
Instead they just massively pissed off every single person who used one of those apps. And it’s going to be real hard to get them back, if at all possible.
Instead they just massively pissed off every single person who used one of those apps. And it’s going to be real hard to get them back, if at all possible.
> Shoot first, talk later.
That's been the pattern; ban @elonjet, come up with a policy that justifies it after.
That's been the pattern; ban @elonjet, come up with a policy that justifies it after.
The absolute contempt to do this to your third party partners without any notification ahead of time and not even an explanation afterwards. It's boggling.
Do not do business with Elon Musk's Twitter. They don't pay their vendors, they don't pay their rent, they completely mishandle the promised severance to the 50% of employees they laid off. And now apparently they'll just cut third party partners off at the knees with no warning.
Do not do business with Elon Musk's Twitter. They don't pay their vendors, they don't pay their rent, they completely mishandle the promised severance to the 50% of employees they laid off. And now apparently they'll just cut third party partners off at the knees with no warning.
They didn’t mishandle severance: they knew they were breaking the law, but they also knew they weren’t going to pay severance anyway, but for the people who did take severance I’m sure the terms of the agreement included the “you can’t class action”, “you can only arbitrate”, “you cannot disparage us”, “you cannot tell anyone we haven’t paid you”, “you cannot assist other lawsuits”, etc
Seriously, people seem obsessed with musk being somehow a genius: he’s not, he lucked out into an owning class family in apartheid SA, was lucky enough to be involved with PayPal, stole Tesla by using PayPal fortune to our lawyer the actual founders of the company. SpaceX is arguably the only thing he’s done himself that is successful, and that seems to be more about being a new company with a billionaire backer than musk himself being somehow a genius there - I’ve seen enough actual experts complaining about him spouting nonsense in his engineering talk to assume it’s a case of big words and confidence making it sound like he knows what he’s talking about than actual competence.
His behaviour, attitude, and treatment of employees shows him to be an office-esque bumbling middle manager with no ethics, and minimal competence or actual imagination.
Seriously, people seem obsessed with musk being somehow a genius: he’s not, he lucked out into an owning class family in apartheid SA, was lucky enough to be involved with PayPal, stole Tesla by using PayPal fortune to our lawyer the actual founders of the company. SpaceX is arguably the only thing he’s done himself that is successful, and that seems to be more about being a new company with a billionaire backer than musk himself being somehow a genius there - I’ve seen enough actual experts complaining about him spouting nonsense in his engineering talk to assume it’s a case of big words and confidence making it sound like he knows what he’s talking about than actual competence.
His behaviour, attitude, and treatment of employees shows him to be an office-esque bumbling middle manager with no ethics, and minimal competence or actual imagination.
> SpaceX is arguably the only thing he’s done himself that is successful
Not even that. Musk’s initial plan for SpaceX was to buy a couple of Dnepr rockets, so he went to Russia in 2001 with Jim Cantrell, Adeo Ressi, and Mike Griffin.
The trip was a failure. But Griffin, who was running In-Q-Tel, the CIA’s investment arm, and had attempted something similar around private launches when running Orbital Sciences in the 1990s, convinced Musk to build his own rockets.
It was a time when a number of space engineering projects were winding down and lots of talented people becoming available. Griffin knew this better than Musk would have and introduced him to the right people and companies.
SpaceX still moved fairly slowly after that, without any launch attempts until Griffin, then the newly appointed NASA Administrator, created the COTS programme and awarded a $400 million contract to SpaceX despite it being unproven.
In 2008, when SpaceX was near bankruptcy, NASA under Griffin again awarded it a huge $1.6 billion dollar contract that both saved it and provided the needed funding for further rocket designs and bets like reusability.
Musk has done a lot with SpaceX, and deserves some credit, but the general view about it being all him and all self funded is inaccurate.
Not even that. Musk’s initial plan for SpaceX was to buy a couple of Dnepr rockets, so he went to Russia in 2001 with Jim Cantrell, Adeo Ressi, and Mike Griffin.
The trip was a failure. But Griffin, who was running In-Q-Tel, the CIA’s investment arm, and had attempted something similar around private launches when running Orbital Sciences in the 1990s, convinced Musk to build his own rockets.
It was a time when a number of space engineering projects were winding down and lots of talented people becoming available. Griffin knew this better than Musk would have and introduced him to the right people and companies.
SpaceX still moved fairly slowly after that, without any launch attempts until Griffin, then the newly appointed NASA Administrator, created the COTS programme and awarded a $400 million contract to SpaceX despite it being unproven.
In 2008, when SpaceX was near bankruptcy, NASA under Griffin again awarded it a huge $1.6 billion dollar contract that both saved it and provided the needed funding for further rocket designs and bets like reusability.
Musk has done a lot with SpaceX, and deserves some credit, but the general view about it being all him and all self funded is inaccurate.
This is interesting and sounds credible, but do you have any sources for this?
Musk on chess:
"I did as a child, but found it to be too simple to be useful in real life: a mere 8 by 8 grid, no fog of war, no technology tree, no random map or spawn position, only 2 players, both sides exact same pieces, etc."
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1584537377837490177
This guy just loves being in over his head, doesn't he?
"I did as a child, but found it to be too simple to be useful in real life: a mere 8 by 8 grid, no fog of war, no technology tree, no random map or spawn position, only 2 players, both sides exact same pieces, etc."
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1584537377837490177
This guy just loves being in over his head, doesn't he?
He may have "stolen" the beginnings of Tesla, but he still ran it for a long time (like he runs twitter now). Somehow he didn't ruin it and instead built a lot of cars and a few big factories. Disregarding all the marketing fluff, I still find the result to be pretty impressive.
Not going to disagree that his behavior at twitter is erratic at best.
Not going to disagree that his behavior at twitter is erratic at best.
> The absolute contempt to do this to your third party partners without any notification ahead of time and not even an explanation afterwards.
... is perfectly in line with how Musk has tweeted Twitter's paying customers of all types, users paying or otherwise, employees and the labor laws protecting them, the FTC, and European data protection authorities since the takeover. As well as apparently software/service suppliers, landlords, etc.
... is perfectly in line with how Musk has tweeted Twitter's paying customers of all types, users paying or otherwise, employees and the labor laws protecting them, the FTC, and European data protection authorities since the takeover. As well as apparently software/service suppliers, landlords, etc.
cant read the full article as usual
but wow this is a low blow. people already didnt trust the Twitter API, now nobody will ever develop on it again.
but wow this is a low blow. people already didnt trust the Twitter API, now nobody will ever develop on it again.
I mean, you CAN still develop against Twitter API, just don't get too popular and end up in the top 20 when Elon sorts descending at 2AM one morning.
It makes complete sense though.
If Elon wants or has to make Twitter profitable he has to make its advertising more effective.
No wonder that, for example, Facebook does not allow any kind of third party apps to interact with the platform.
If Elon wants or has to make Twitter profitable he has to make its advertising more effective.
No wonder that, for example, Facebook does not allow any kind of third party apps to interact with the platform.
> Facebook does not allow any kind of third party apps to interact with the platform.
https://developers.facebook.com/products/
So we’re just gonna pretend none of this exists?
https://developers.facebook.com/products/
So we’re just gonna pretend none of this exists?
Iirc none of those libraries allowed you to build alternative facebook clients, whereas iirc the twitter apis did.
I remember playing with the twitter apis many years ago, and effectively you could do most things without any official client side and without displaying any advertising.
So yeah.
I remember playing with the twitter apis many years ago, and effectively you could do most things without any official client side and without displaying any advertising.
So yeah.
I’m not sure it does. In lieu of serving ads, the major clients pay for Twitter V2 API access which they recover from their users through subscriptions.
Twitter could have placed ads in the API feed and required certain analytics, it chose not to. Similarly, the revenue from these clients comes from countries where Twitter Blue is not available.
Moreover these third party clients are predominantly used by the kinds of power users on the platform who act as a draw for other users to join and stay on Twitter. They have value far in excess of their direct revenue.
I can’t see any way that this makes sense from a revenue perspective.
Twitter could have placed ads in the API feed and required certain analytics, it chose not to. Similarly, the revenue from these clients comes from countries where Twitter Blue is not available.
Moreover these third party clients are predominantly used by the kinds of power users on the platform who act as a draw for other users to join and stay on Twitter. They have value far in excess of their direct revenue.
I can’t see any way that this makes sense from a revenue perspective.
Paywalled, anyone have a mirror?
[deleted]
[deleted]
The Information is a 100% hard-paywalled site. No web captures are ever available. A current subscriber would have to screenshot/PDF an article and make it available.
I'll give Elon credit for finding new ways to surprise me.