Add that to the list of even more reasons why this is an issue. However, even stating oh well, tell them to use their cell phones, obviously isn't a solution of any degree. Smart Phone penetration in the US, for example, is still less than 20%...
On Aug 13, 9:43 am, earth2marsh <ma...@earth2marsh.com> wrote: > At least "people at work" have the potential to use phones to access > Twitter… > > I'm worried about users like those in China behind The Great Firewall. > Currently, they can interact with Twitter by using proxies and http > basic auth. But OAuth requires access to twitter.com (or some sort of > mediation). xAuth could be a solution, but there is already a shortage > of clients that support alternate endpoints, and some of those use > OAuth instead of xAuth (or neither). > > When basic auth is shut off, who knows how many Chinese voices will > fall silent… or in North Korea. Or in Iran. Or in …? > > I'm interested in hearing what others think about this. > > Marsh > > On Aug 12, 10:31 pm, TheGuru <jsort...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I'm curious to post this question to see if Twitter has fully thought > > out the impact of forcing OAuth onto their API applications. While it > > may appear to be a more secure method preferred in principle by users, > > the fact of the matter is that one of the main benefits of the API, is > > the ability for third party twitter alternatives to be created, thus > > allowing people to tweet during "business hours", when they normally > > could not due to firewall / web sense restrictions, etc, that prevent > > them from accessing the twitter.com domain. > > > Via basic authentication, users would never have to visit twitter.com > > to login and gain access to twitter functionality via api clients. By > > shutting this down, you are now forcing ALL potential users to login > > via twitter.com, many of which do not have access to this domain in > > their workplace environment, thus excluding them from easily using > > your service wholesale. > > > This can / will, I suspect, have significant impact on twitter usage / > > volume, unless I am missing something and there is an alternative the > > does not require them to directly access the twitter.com domain to > > grant access.
