Raffi,

Tweet id is a no-brainer. We understand that an linear incrementing
number does not scale because at some point it must cycle back to 1.

Search is a different animal.

When I do a Twitter search, I expect your system to tell me what is
*happening* right now. I am NOT expecting your system to tell me what
is *popular* right now.

This popular tweet thing is diluting and violating your entire mission
of "real-time".

If I search for "earthquake" I want to see what is *happening* in real-
time. I have no interest in seeing a 30-minute old tweet from @aplusk
or @ev just because they are trusted accounts and the tweet is being
retweeted a lot (to simplify the popularity algorithm).

If people have a need to see popular tweets, you know what? That is an
ideal service to be provided by a third-party developer/service.

Twitter is real-time, and has defined real-time information. Stick to
it. Don't dilute your mission.

On Apr 6, 1:03 am, Raffi Krikorian <ra...@twitter.com> wrote:
> we have the developer advocate we want, but, of course, please feel free to
> reach out to taylor with your concerns and what you would like him to do to
> help you all out.  i'm sure he would welcome the help.
>
> as for what's going on behind the scenes, i'll describe it out as so:
>
>    - tweet ID generation - this is a pure scalability problem that lays at
>    the heart of twitter being able to grow.  unless i'm mistaken, in the end, 
> a
>    centralized way of generating tweet IDs that are strictly increasing by one
>    does not scale.  the method that we generate tweet IDs, and therefore the
>    IDs themselves, will, almost probably, have to change.
>    - popular tweets in search - twitter is increasingly being relied upon to
>    be the place for relevant real-time information.  most end-users would say
>    that a time indexed search stream is not as valuable.  as you all can
>    probably tell, keeping a real time search index operational is hard enough,
>    but imagine keeping a service running that is simultaneously delivering
>    relevant results along with time indexed results.  that's significantly
>    harder.
>
> those are the issues facing us.  as i said, please bear with us -- once we
> have weighed all these issues internally, we will of course, let everybody
> know.  we've heard the concerns, but, if there are new ones, please let us
> know!
>
> On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 8:28 PM, Orian Marx (@orian) 
> <or...@orianmarx.com>wrote:
>
>
>
> > Raffi, one of the things that really stands out for me in what you are
> > saying here is that there are lots of "moving pieces" that the team is
> > trying to "align quickly". The question is, who and what is dictating
> > the schedule? I get the sense that all the recent changes are parts of
> > a bigger picture plan for Twitter, but the reality is that Twitter HQ
> > has not conveyed a real sense of this bigger picture to the developer
> > community - and it certainly hasn't conveyed why these recent changes
> > need to "align quickly". So inevitably the situation at hand seems to
> > be that some serious developer concerns effectively need to be pushed
> > aside in order to meet some internal goals of Twitter that have not
> > been made public. I can understand that as a choice that Twitter
> > management might make. What I think would be unreasonable would be for
> > Twitter to expect the developer community to not push back.
>
> > I think it's pretty clear that the "developer advocate" concept needs
> > to be fleshed out more, and i'll try to push for that at Chirp. If
> > anyone else is interested in helping make that discussion productive,
> > lets get started :-)
>
> > On Apr 5, 8:45 pm, Raffi Krikorian <ra...@twitter.com> wrote:
> > > to clarify (from my personal view), what taylor has provided to the team
> > is
> > > a clear view into what developers want / think / feel -- basically, a
> > pulse
> > > on the developer community.  he's doing a fine job.  and for these
> > > particular issues, not only has he conveyed the feelings of our
> > community,
> > > but everybody on the team has also heard it personally.  i hope we have
> > more
> > > to say about both these topics soon.  as you can all imagine, there is a
> > > myriad of moving pieces that we are all trying to get to align quickly --
> > > there are technical issues, there are the concerns of our developer and
> > user
> > > community, and then, of course, there are the overall objectives of
> > Twitter,
> > > Inc.  getting them all to align is, at times, ridiculously difficult.
>
> > > On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 5:01 PM, Dewald Pretorius <dpr...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > To be fair to Taylor, we may be expecting too much from his role.
>
> > > > When reading the job description of a Twitter Developer Advocate [1],
> > > > the only traditional advocate responsibility listed there is
> > > > "Represent developer needs when planning new API features and
> > > > changes."
>
> > > > Now, if Taylor conveyed our objections to the Platform team, then he
> > > > adequately executed that responsibility. I'm sure he did.
>
> > > > The rest of the responsibilities all speak in a Twitter to Developer
> > > > direction, i.e., more a Communicator than an Advocate.
>
> > > > In particular, in the About This Job section, it says, "it is
> > > > necessary to have an official voice regularly communicating with the
> > > > community," which underlines Communicator instead of Advocate.
>
> > > > [1]http://dld.bz/7Z
>
> > > > On Apr 4, 9:39 pm, funkatron <funkat...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Taylor,
>
> > > > > I'm about to vent. Sorry about this.
>
> > > > > At some point did you plan on addressing any of the numerous
> > > > > complaints raised against making this anything other than opt-in?
>
> > > > > Several of us raised this, and you offered no response for 10 days.
> > > > > See <http://groups.google.com/group/twitter-development-talk/
> > > > > browse_thread/thread/983086ae9935d50c/d4a8e0fbc0fee5c0?
> > > > > lnk=gst&q=popular+search#d4a8e0fbc0fee5c0>
>
> > > > > When you *did* post, you didn't actually address any concerns, or say
> > > > > "hey, I spoke with the API team. This is why it's going like this."
> > > > > Like, say, an advocate of 3rd party developers would do.
>
> > > > > I'm not doing Twitter any favors; I realize that. I'm just the
> > > > > developer of a tiny, old open source client whose been hacking away
> > on
> > > > > the API since spring of 2007. I'm not a strategic partner, and I
> > don't
> > > > > bring Twitter any value. No VC funding will be coming my way, I'm
> > > > > afraid, and it doesn't make headlines on TechCrunch when I add a new
> > > > > feature (ping.fm? I supported that in 2007).
>
> > > > > But what I would like is to be treated with some respect. If you post
> > > > > something, and get significant pushback, I'd expect at *very* least
> > > > > some explanation about why doing it the way you guys want to do it is
> > > > > a great idea. If you are an advocate for 3rd party developers, as I
> > > > > interpreted your title, then doing us the courtesy of not simply
> > > > > ignoring/avoiding the concerns we voice seems like part of your job.
>
> > > > > It seems like you're doing a lot of selling of changes to *us*.
> > That's
> > > > > not an advocate -- that's an evangelist. If your role there is an
> > > > > evangelist, then fine. You're doing a good job of ignoring the
> > tougher
> > > > > questions and sticking to company lines.
>
> > > > > The point here is that I used to cut the API crew a lot of slack
> > > > > because I thought they at least weren't feeding us a line. I felt
> > they
> > > > > actually were aiming for transparency, but were just overworked.
>
> > > > > If this is the way things are gonna go with someone who is,
> > > > > presumably, tasked with being *our* advocate, I think Twitter is
> > > > > losing the thread. Maybe it doesn't matter for you guys financially,
> > > > > and you'll go on and do Very Important Things and lots of people will
> > > > > continue to view Twitter as Game-Changing Technology, but it sure is
> > a
> > > > > bummer for me.
>
> > > > > --
> > > > > Ed Finklerhttp://funkatron.com
> > > > > @funkatron
> > > > > AIM: funka7ron / ICQ: 3922133 / 
> > > > > XMPP:funkat...@gmail.com<xmpp%3afunkat...@gmail.com>
> > <xmpp%3afunkat...@gmail.com <xmpp%253afunkat...@gmail.com>>
>
> > > > > On Apr 1, 8:53 pm, Taylor Singletary <taylorsinglet...@twitter.com>
> > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > Hi Folks,
>
> > > > > > As indicated a few weeks ago, we're launching our new *beta*
> > > > enhancements to
> > > > > > search.twitter.com and the Search API today -- it's currently
> > rolling
> > > > out to
> > > > > > our servers. Thank you all for your feedback.
>
> > > > > > *Key API Takeaways*:
>
> > > > > >   - During the current phase, receiving "popular tweets" in your
> > API
> > > > search
> > > > > > results is *OPT-IN*. You will not see the new top results in search
> > > >  unless
> > > > > > you specify the *result_typ**e* parameter on your search query
> > string.
>
> > > > > >   - The result_type parameter takes one of three values:
> > > > > >     * *mixed* - receive both "popular tweets" and most recent
> > tweets
> > > > for the
> > > > > > query. This is the equivalent of the future default behavior.
> > > > > >     * *popular* - receive only "popular tweets" for the query.
> > > > > >     * *recent* - receive only recent results for the query. This is
> > the
> > > > > > equivalent of the behavior you've come to expect until present
>
> > > > > >   - Each tweet in a search result will now contain a metadata node,
> > > > with a
> > > > > > field called 'result_type' that indicates whether the tweet is
> > > > "popular" or
> > > > > > "recent". In the future, there may be other result_types. The
> > metadata
> > > > node
> > > > > > will eventually contain other fields as well.
>
> > > > > >   - In addition to result_type, the metadata node may also include
> > a
> > > > > > 'recent_retweets' field indicating the number of retweets the tweet
> > has
> > > > > > received recently, rounded to a reasonable integer.
>
> > > > > >   - This metadata field will now appear in search results
> > regardless of
> > > > your
> > > > > > OPT-IN status on the popular tweets feature. You don't have to do
> > > > anything
> > > > > > to receive this new metadata along with tweets in search results.
> > In
> > > > JSON,
> > > > > > the metadata field is simply "metadata." In XML, you'll see it
> > > > expressed as
> > > > > > "<twitter:metadata>".
>
> > > > > > *Continued Discussion*:
>
> > > > > > To date, Twitter's real-time search has proven to be incredibly
> > > > valuable.
> > > > > > People, businesses and organizations have come to depend on finding
> > out
> > > > > > what's being discussed about a particular topic *right now*.
>
> > > > > > We've been really impressed at the integrations many of you have
> > > > developed
> > > > > > using the Search API. Whether it's offering search columns in a
> > Twitter
> > > > > > client, mapping #hashtags to search, or deep analysis of trends and
> > > > brand
> > > > > > monitoring, you've shown us what's possible with Twitter search.
>
> > > > > > With this new project, we want
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Reply via email to