if I were to do it over again…
November 13, 2008 at 10:53 am 11 comments
If I were to do this over again, I probably would’ve done 2 things differently. Firstly, I would’ve come up with an algorithm that works with Twitter’s Search API, which doesn’t require authentication. Secondly, I would’ve handled posting to twitter differently, which would’ve sacrificed virality, but after today, I’m not so sure insane rapid growth is really worth it. So… sorry, Twitterverse. I’ll do better next time. Promise.
Also, one last thought before I go to bed (damn, it’s almost 6am here): it doesn’t seem like Twitter rate-limited me, even though I’m certain I went over the 100 requests per 60 minute limit (by orders of magnitude, in fact). I’m not sure if that’s a bug or a feature since I haven’t heard a peep from them… but if anyone at Twitter is listening: thanks guys!
Entry filed under: Uncategorized.
11 Comments Add your own
Leave a reply to Navarr Cancel reply
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed
Twitterank - That's with one 'r' 
1.
Prem | November 13, 2008 at 11:01 am
Good luck with the whole new plan to conquer the twitterverse 😀
May your dreams be filled with more ingenuous ideas to hold sway over the meek tweeple 😛
2.
Martin Polley | November 13, 2008 at 12:37 pm
I’m pretty sure the rate limiting is _per user_. From the API docs:
Unauthenticated requests are rate limited by IP, and authenticated requests are tracked by the requesting user ID.
So you’re OK 🙂
3.
Navarr | November 13, 2008 at 1:53 pm
You weren’t rate limited because you were using each different person’s credentials to access the API. (Rate limits are on people, not services).
4.
austin | November 13, 2008 at 7:34 pm
don’t let negative articles get you down bro. learn and keep living!
5.
Leigh Honeywell | November 13, 2008 at 11:14 pm
The whole freak-out seems silly to me – it’s not like you’re the first service which asks for twitter usernames and passwords.
Also, the rate-limiting is per-account, not per-IP, which (depending on your algorithm) may explain why you didn’t get rate-limited.
-Leigh
6.
luis | November 13, 2008 at 11:52 pm
Ryo, You shouldn’t be apologizing. These people are irrational sheep, and misplaced paranoia is a self-replicating virus. I wrote a lengthy discourse about it, as well as some thoughts as to what you could’ve done differently here. Cheers mate.
7. Twitterank Might Not Have Been a Phishing Scam, But It Was Fascinating | November 14, 2008 at 7:10 pm
[…] developer, now known to be Ryo Chijiiwa (@ryochiji), has noted in his blog that he regrets these decisions, writing “I probably would’ve done 2 things differently. […]
8. Twitterank Might Not Have Been a Phishing Scam, But It Was Fascinating »TechAddress | November 14, 2008 at 7:30 pm
[…] developer, now known to be Ryo Chijiiwa (@ryochiji), has noted in his blog that he regrets these decisions, writing “I probably would’ve done 2 things differently. […]
9. Obama White House to Broadcast Weekly Radio Address on YouTube »TechAddress | November 14, 2008 at 7:31 pm
[…] developer, now known to be Ryo Chijiiwa (@ryochiji), has noted in his blog that he regrets these decisions, writing “I probably would’ve done 2 things differently. […]
10. Twitterank Might Not Have Been a Phishing Scam, But It Was Fascinating | Latest Technology News - Business News And Expert Advice | November 15, 2008 at 3:04 pm
[…] developer, now known to be Ryo Chijiiwa (@ryochiji), has noted in his blog that he regrets these decisions, writing “I probably would’ve done 2 things differently. […]
11. Twitterank and TwitterGrader: Real Credibility or Ego Boosts? | Web 2.0 - Online Visibility - PR - Social Networking | November 17, 2008 at 3:37 pm
[…] an algorithm described by its creator as “vewy, vewy secwet” based (I suppose) on your number of followers, how many you’re following, how many Tweets you […]