219 karma · joined May 25, 2012
hnchat:5qq3iyf9THYLESV6bHsR
I really think Twitter could have been better off by selling developer access to the pipes. Charge by the user or by the api call. Some way to still encourage the 3rd party platforms while also seeing some monetary benefit from it.
We've even taken to using it when sitting side by side with laptops to reduce craning your neck or backseat coding.
Anything that uses something other than a .com in a way that relates to the brand name.
I'm not poo-pooing I genuinely want to know. I would love for something like this to become huge.
Developers never had a chance to help IE grow. IE stagnated because it was locked up and Microsoft was happy with it's state.
Webkit is open and being worked on by many people in many different places. Webkit can grow with help from outside of itself. IE could not.
I'm lucky to be in a situation where I'm surrounded by smarter programmers. I'm learning tons and the effects have been very noticeable. Some "better" programmers can be hard to deal with but if you have patience and a willingness to learn you will benefit greatly.
There's also http://nodester.com but I've had to move away from them due to too many problems.
I don't need another social network. I don't need ads removed from my current social feed. I don't need app.net.
If twitter died tomorrow something else would pop up. That's the nature of the space. We don't need it and so we go where there is less friction. Ease of use, ease of joining, and ease of finding those I care about most. That's all that matters.
I see App.net becoming something much like svbtle. A highly curated space much like a country club where only those willing to pay the entry fee are allowed in.
Cool.
As long as the data is available publicly through feeds and other api's it won't matter too much. It's still blogging, it's still tweeting, but now your participants have been restricted. Not as much as Svbtle but enough to encourage a certain atmosphere.