The other levels of Streaming access are not only considerably more cost
effective for all parties, they are also (nearly) sufficient for the vast
majority of applications.

-John Kalucki
http://twitter.com/jkalucki
Services, Twitter Inc.


On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 10:16 PM, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky
<zzn...@gmail.com>wrote:

> Thanks!! At this point, I'm not sure I'll be using the firehose even
> if it is available -I don't think I can afford the pipe width to
> consume it. ;-)
>
> On Dec 14, 9:59 pm, John Kalucki <j...@twitter.com> wrote:
> > There will be further announcements about Streaming API access early next
> > year.
> >
> > -John Kaluckihttp://twitter.com/jkalucki
> > Services, Twitter Inc.
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 9:09 PM, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky <
> zzn...@gmail.com>wrote:
> >
> > > Last week at Le Web, Twitter's Platform Director, Ryan Sarver,
> > > announced that Twitter will be "opening the firehose to all
> > > developers." As I recall, there were a number of reasons why Twitter
> > > kept the firehose restricted. Some of these were "legal reasons".
> >
> > > I'm starting to put together an action plan for 2010, and I'm really
> > > curious - what has changed legally since then that would allow Twitter
> > > to open the firehose to "all developers?" What legal agreements /
> > > licenses / contracts must a developer commit to in order to gain
> > > access to the firehose?
> >
> > > --
> > > M. Edward (Ed) Borasky
> > >http://borasky-research.net
> >
> > > "I've always regarded nature as the clothing of God." ~Alan Hovhaness
>

Reply via email to