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 >