Nowadays, applying for a Twitter API involves so many hurdles and reviews that it feels as complicated as filling out a party membership application. Before I even have a product, I need to explain what I intend to do with it, only to be told that my idea violates a series of Twitter’s policies. Is Twitter’s review department acting like thought police?
Developers have been venting online, sharing similar problems they’ve encountered. It seems the solution is to write various guarantees. I’ll use AI to automatically generate a reply in a bit.
Looking back, it’s interesting to see how Twitter rose, developed, and then declined. Twitter’s greatest value in the past was its openness, not just in terms of free speech but also in the freedom and openness of its API. This led to countless fun applications and ecosystems growing on Twitter, making it a battleground for social media and a go-to place for customer service complaints to big companies. However, Twitter soon started encroaching on the space for third-party client products and gradually moved towards speech control and censorship. The new Twitter API 2.0 is heavily controlled compared to the old API. While Twitter’s intention to eliminate spam bots might be good, they should find ways to analyze issues at a deeper level rather than restricting developers’ freedom.
Nostr
Fortunately, Twitter isn’t the only option. Recently, Nostr, a highly geeky open protocol, has shown some promise. While it’s still somewhat lacking in usability, we can already see a rich ecosystem burgeoning. We might also join this ecosystem.
Here are various Nostr resources for those interested in exploring further:
Mastodon doesn’t stand a chance primarily because of its flawed design — it’s not truly decentralized. If you can’t stand a big dictator like Twitter, you’ll find a bunch of small dictators even worse, and they’ll block each other as well. Nostr solves this problem.
Blockchain-based ones like Lens Protocol and Farcaster, despite their significant funding and numerous bounty hunters, are driven by strong commercial interests from the outset, making them hard to sustain. Lens Protocol mechanically implements some aspects of past social networks using smart contracts, while Farcaster irrationally requires users to register names on Ethereum and is invitation-only.
Twitter’s own Bluesky is still just a concept, XMPP is more of a chat protocol that’s not truly decentralized, and considering DeSo’s background with BitClout and Basis, it’s better to pass on it. There’s also a slew of pseudo-DID projects riding the DID hype, some claiming to be social networks, but they’re not worth mentioning.
ArcBlock?
Can’t reveal too much, but I’ve always valued the social aspect. I’m a firm supporter of open social protocols, and we will definitely support open standards rather than creating something closed off. We will likely engage with Nostr, but to what extent remains to be officially announced.
Disclaimer: This article does not constitute investment advice. Users should consider whether any opinions, views, or conclusions in this article are suitable for their specific situation and ensure compliance with relevant laws and regulations in their country and region.
