2009/6/1 Nick Arnett <nick.arn...@gmail.com>: > > > On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 3:57 PM, Stuart <stut...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Much as I respect Twitter and the great people who work there, I don't >> buy that this would place too much demand on their servers. They >> already use Memcached extensively, and this would be a pretty simple >> addition to that data store. > > For that very reason, I'm not sure it makes sense for third parties to > collaborate on a single-purpose distributed store. There are user/account > properties that Twitter won't implement, at least not until there's a lot of > demonstrated value. In other words, the developer community could > collaborate on problems that have marginal value to Twitter in the short > run.
I'm not suggesting that it would only be usable as an ID => screen_name repository. I'm suggesting that we could build our own "copy" of the user data so we can provide API calls that Twitter don't or won't. Clearly this is not ideal, but if there's no other choice I definitely believe it's worth the effort. At the end of the day it comes down to this.... would you pay to have higher API limits? Would Twitter be interested in providing higher limits to paying developers? At any rate, based on what Doug has just said it's probably not worth doing anything until the new TOS are published, just in case it turns out to be wasted effort. -Stuart -- http://stut.net/projects/twitter/
