Twitter bug: Make anyone follow you on Twitter
blog.gcg.me
blog.gcg.me
Seriously, it's only Twitter. Conflict, famine, and poverty are bad for the world, but Twitter doesn't matter.
If they are providing actual value, and people care enough to follow them back - where's the bad for the world part? Unless it's just selling vi4gr4, then perhaps. But they're not actively spamming people (unless they follow them back, in which case they opted in.)
I'd actually love being marketed to this way, and I think it is a viable way of allowing the marketing you want into your life. As opposed to "hot girls are waiting for you on Zoosk"
I don't even spam people. I send one link to my site per every 5 witty and inspirational quotes. A few people that I met over there have contributed to my site as guest bloggers.
I am not doing anything evil - just automating something that I would hate to do manually.
Spammers like you end up making people judge Twitter as "more spam" and giving it up before they've really tried it properly.
Your followers are probably more likely than normal users to give up Twitter because it's just pointless noise.
Simple utilitarian argument against what you're doing: if 10% of the Twitter population did what you do, Twitter would become mostly useless.
I really hope they write scripts to detect and ban you.
It's not an ad hominem, it's an outright insult. I am not attacking his character to win an unrelated argument. I am just attacking his character.
http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html
I'd suggest vigorously arguing his ideas, not his character. I'd actually be really interested in reading a vigorous discussion of "To bot or not to bot" as it relates to twitter, Facebook and Buzz.
I think discussing where the line is between automating specific marketing tasks and spamming lies is a really interesting question. I'd really enjoy reading both of you vigorously defend your oppposing points of view.
But, this discussion has now degenerated into insults which robs me of the potential insights that both of you might have on the situation.
I feel that posting insults also communicates to noob HN readers that insults are okay in this community, when in fact, it's not. One of the reasons that people like you and I have felt compelled to heavily invest our time here over the years is because we've generally managed to keep insulting comments at bay. :)
Ok, I'll avoid devolving to insults in the future (though for this specific conversation it's a bit late). Thanks for taking the time to make that point.
"Now buy this thing, plz".
FYI: twitter did fix this problem somewhat. After 2000 following you need to have a ratio within 10%. So following 2001 (or was it 2002) requires 1800 followers. This strategy only works for the first 2000. Presumably, he's got to clean up quite a few times before breaking past this, an easier solution would be drop it down to 1000 or even 500, something no normal person would add in a day (but even I have found cases where I add more than this in a day legitimately - within a small niche I do business, to add everyone relevant it's around 700-900 I think).
Finally, how do you find the traffic quality? From what I've seen it's crap. I've pushed ~1 million clicks in the last 2 months or so and it's pretty worthless in my experience. I think are a lot of bots and stat services just hitting it, definitely not real traffic.
edit: anyone downmodding care to suggest how putting "accept[username]" in a tweet would be considered a 'bug'?
It's obviously not a bug. It's a hidden feature. An easter egg. A floor in their design.
They didn't "accidentally" make a special command in tweets that can cause others to follow you. They specifically intended for it to be that way.
Suggesting it's a "bug" is silly. Suggesting they "fixed the bug" is misleading.
Is the feature documented then? I assumed it was a hidden secret thing.
I assumed that it was more of an intentional 'backdoor'.
(horrible ayn rand joke)
"If it ever says I’m following more than one person, I’ve been hacked. I’m a completely monogamous Twitterer—I only follow Sarah Killen."
In order to provoke curiosity and amusement
As a celebrity comedy writer and television host
I want to only be shown as following one otherwise-unknown person in Michigan
Page refreshes were very slow. The elves are busy.
eg. "accept snoopdog"
I know that if I actually had to rebuild my followee list for "testing" this little hack out I would probably decide it wasn't worth the effort to start over again on Twitter.
I'd had a legitimate 30ish followers, used this bug a few times, now 0.
edit: seems everyone is at 0/0, but the bug still produces an error for me.
That's pretty much untrue.
Anyway, I don't imagine it's too hard to grep the logs for the last day's worth of POST and 'accept .*' and undo all the follows constructed from that.
This seems like an extremely basic design flaw.
Thought I could sell it afterwards or something. lol
This is such an odd bug. I guess it goes to show that nobody knows what strange code which should have been removed four years ago lurks in the heart of Twitter.
And people wondering why Axl Rose is following him here :) http://www.mygnrforum.com/index.php?showtopic=164026&st=...
Obviously, their so called "cleanup" is incomplete, at least for me :)
http://status.twitter.com/post/587210796/follow-bug-discover...
As of now the problem appears to be fixed for a lot of people already.
Somebody is working late tonight.
"accept BillGates": = ;? ;? ;A ;F ;J ; ;* ;E ;C ;C ;/ ;= ;J ;A ;I ;
Maybe they already really fixed this bug (I hope).
Edit: Looks like this probably already happened.
If you look at "following" lists, everything is showing up as zero for me right now, as in it shows that I'm not following anyone. All other users that I check are also showing that they aren't following anyone.
And to top it off, one line of code I checked in late last night prevented 200 new users from signing up on my freshly minted site.
Felicia Day is still following me. ^-^