Twitter Just Shut Down Ribbon’s Newly Launched In-Stream Payments Feature
techcrunch.com
techcrunch.com
Why don't we all go back to AOL and Geocities. The problem with Twitter is that it is not clear exactly what their approach to their revenue problem might be. I understand they want to monetize their API but does that go hand-in-hand with quashing every potential competitor who happens to use the API with a modicum of success?
I'm bearish about any company that builds a data warehouse on the basis of access and open-ness and then decides to restrict that access at a later date for the sake of profitability. It's just distasteful and speaks volumes.
This is a great example of why you should never build a business on Twitter: http://bostinno.streetwise.co/2013/03/04/how-twitter-came-to...
Partnering with Twitter is still quite reasonable, but creating an Enterprise based upon their APIs is foolish at best.
I don't believe Twitter doesn't know how they are going to generate revenue. I'm not convinced they can actually implement their ideas, but, if they had no ideas, I think they would be letting other companies throw themselves at the wall, then picking off the ones that stick via acquisitions. That they just squash them implies they think they know what they are doing.
A lot of api providers seem to have a few limited (mostly lame) use cases in mind. Developers by their nature are creative boundry pushers. Conflict is inevitable.
I just wish api providers would take greater care in thinking about and describing what exactly is going to be allowed and not. Rather than putting something out there, having developers throw things at the wall, then banning things you don't like after the fact.
But they don't, it's a painful lesson to learn.
I would think that being able to operate that way is exactly the reason you want to offer an API. So that your users can come up with ideas for you. Trying to anticipate up front every conceivable use of an API and publishing it with a huge list of rules based on conjecture makes for a pretty crappy API.
First I used the reddit api, when reddit cut that off I was able to crowdsource a data feed from users through a browser extension.
Then reddit convinced google to have unedditreddit removed from the app store. I switched to a firefox extension now so we will see what happens.
Further, why does twitter make it hard to pay them for API use?
Further, we haven't heard Twitter's side to this -- was there a violation of the TOS that the Tech bloggers didn't catch (or bother finding the other side of the story?)
Essentially you're jumping the gun in saying that Twitter is two-faced ("They say they're open but they're really not") all based upon no data or concrete evidence.
Yes because I can't think of any other examples where Twitter has screwed developers.... Oh wait....
Yes, there might be a TOS issue here (and maybe even a valid one) but their track record makes it pretty clear that they just don't give a shit about developers.
They have changed their terms for third party integration about 2 years ago (somebody correct me) and since then strongly discourage third parties from trying to leverage Twitter for their own profit. Anyone seriously betting on getting away despite the publicly expressed discouragement from 2 years ago is getting what is to be expected.
It looks like what Ribbon submitted to the Twitter validator was a video using the "player" card: http://cl.ly/image/2R2i1J302Z2g
The player card is designed to handle embedding videos, which is what Ribbon initially showed, however when they launched their new feature they morphed the embedding options to display a custom in-stream purchase button / unit.
In reality, they should have just used a 'product' card (granted, they would not have the added ability to purchase in stream - it would need to link back to their website).
Using the player card was a pretty clever way to get the payments to happen directly on twitter, but it seems that it bent too many of their rules. They'll probably just have to use the product card like everyone else.
Chirpify has been enabling in-stream commerce and payments on Twitter for over a year now. Also in-stream on Instagram and Facebook. No TOS violations http://chirpify.com
It is very likely that a user would find these cards and inadvertently start a purchase without realizing that this actually not supported by twitter.
That's why they shut it down.
They're simply protecting themselves from a series of problems that would be completely out of Twitter's control to help in any way. Twitter would always come up the loser for any of Ribbon's mistakes. They don't even have a way to punt any support issues over to Ribbon.
It's very clear that Twitter want to control every possible aspect of the monetisation of Twitter.
I propose "network traps", "progress sinks" or "sucker tub". I don't know but I keep getting a recurring imagery when thinking of these situations as of someone building a house on a raft, which immediately capsizes, but the buoyancy of the house causes the raft to lift out of the water.
all I really mean by this that if Twitter were not being malicious here they would be able to work with Ribbon and other companies who have similar ideas that could help change the internet for the better.
Or as I said here: https://twitter.com/davidu/status/313826471019954176
The risk to sharecropping on another platform just seems too great to outweigh the audience / signup / integration / etc. benefits.
http://blog.ribbon.co/an-update-on-in-stream-payments-on-twi...
This looks like a clever hack of the Twitter implementation of the Player card and not the intended use. The stream and content type attributes both are empty, for example. Does anyone know if this sort of implementation is what that card is supposed to allow?
I say "sadly," as if this is the case, Ribbon have just made every other developer's life that bit more difficult.
I really hope they haven't been that underhand, though.
Maybe it's just an old screenshot though. I don't know.
Err....TechCrunch, two hours earlier? Or is that the joke?
I also agree with the sentiment that building anything on Twitter is a risky proposition these days. That said, there's still an appeal in doing so given the volume of users.
"We’ve had discussions with Twitter in the past, and are eager to find a way to work together."
Or did they say "There is no way you can do this, and we will shut you down."?
'Discussions' gives us no information.
I can see how it's good for sellers, but am missing how it is so clearly good for me as a buyer (which is what I assume is meant by "Twitter users all over the world"). Is it that I can spend money without learning about what I'm buying beyond what fits into 140 chars that makes it good? Do people do that?
I just don't....get Twitter at the moment. It'd be nice to have some clarification of why they wish to pursue this draconian mindset, but that's asking too much. I'm surprised that services such as Buffer have came so far.
It's a genius idea, but sadly Ribbon just wasted a lot of time and money building a product they can't use. A painful lesson, never build a business on Twitter.
There's probably many reasons why Twitter shut it down, but there's also many reasons why developing a product around Twitter these days is, frankly, kind of batshit crazy.