> > Openness about abuse is generally counter-productive for everyone. For
> > example, opaque limits are harder to game and give better detection
> > signals. Also, practically, limits need to be adjusted without notice
> > to respond changing attacks. In the end, valid access that is
> > difficult to distinguish from access overwhelmingly used for invalid
> > purposes are sometimes, sadly, going to get caught in a low-latency
> > high-volume countermeasure system.
> How about you just answer my question?
> What you're saying is mankind is wrong to live by well defined and
> concrete rules.

Um, no. What John is saying is that Twitter doesn't live by them. And,
considering that Twitter is a relatively new medium, that's pretty much
by definition.

> Of course the reality is Twitter is another laissez fair bums on seats
> driven site and as google proved, there is nothing like the abiltiy to
> change the rules on a whim, or hide a problem for a company of this
> ilk.

The line for Jaiku starts over there.

------------------------------------ personal: http://www.cameronkaiser.com/ --
  Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * ckai...@floodgap.com
-- Prediction is very difficult, especially ... about the future. -- Niels Bohr

Reply via email to