top | item 4401830

It's Time for an Open Twitter

38 points| jv22222 | 13 years ago |justinvincent.com | reply

44 comments

order
[+] e-dard|13 years ago|reply
An alternative to Twitter has existed since 2008. It's called identi.ca

http://identi.ca/

The issue is getting people to start using such a service.

[+] emilsedgh|13 years ago|reply
People in HackerNews tend to ignore things that have no 'funding', 'VC', 'capital', 'investment', 'startup' or related terminology.

In this very same thread people are mentioning that an open, distributed system is needed or that they'Will contribute by code and kind'.

And identi.ca is not even mentioned in the article.

Disclaimer: Im not trying to be offensive through other posters. They may simply not know about identi.ca. But that proves my point even more. Twitter and app.net have been discussed so much in the past few weeks. Identi.ca barely got any attention.

[+] riffic|13 years ago|reply
Identi.ca is not the alternative; it is a site which runs software called StatusNet.

This is like saying Wordpress.com is the alternative to Blogger. The alternative is the software which runs the site.

Most importantly, this software needs to speak a standardized protocol. Luckily, this protocol exists -- it is called OStatus.

[+] jv22222|13 years ago|reply
If app.net can get the press it has gotten it probably means that the marketplace has reached boiling point. I'm thinking developers and many twitter users are ready for a more reliable and trust-able system.
[+] hahainternet|13 years ago|reply
How about we just use XMPP. You know, the currently existing, extensible, email address syntax using distributed messaging platform?

Why does nobody seem to think of this?

[+] Todd|13 years ago|reply
XMPP is probably the best approach. I'm currently investigating this path myself. The disparate set of alternative protocols that app.net is considering are the same ones that diaspora* used. The result is a server that speaks several overlapping protocols.

In order to be successful, what this space really needs is a de facto server, like Sendmail, but one that's easy to set up and configure. Over time, this would make it possible to have a critical mass of compatible servers that speak the same set of XEP extensions. There are many open source XMPP servers. I think one reason this hasn't happened already is that most of them are difficult to set up and configure.

[+] Shish2k|13 years ago|reply
Does XMPP allow you to follow a person and see all their public messages as they're posted? Does it allow you to see historic posts for a user? Can you search the network for all messages with a given tag, and get a live stream of updates? Can you see trending tags?
[+] prodigal_erik|13 years ago|reply
If we're looking at existing protocols for multicast store-and-forward, XMPP requires extensions for some of what SMTP already has.
[+] vannevar|13 years ago|reply
It would be relatively easy to build a Twitter service on top of email. Participating email providers would give every email account its own listserv account. Followers would be subscribed to the list. Tweet emails would have only a 144-character subject, no body (plus any multimedia attachments). You could still use your email normally, but also access the full Twitter functionality with a special client via the web, phone, or computer. Anyone with a normal email account could follow you, though they would have to have an account with a participating email provider in order to tweet or retweet. If a couple of the big players implemented it, the service would have critical mass overnight.
[+] slantyyz|13 years ago|reply
Why not build it on NNTP?
[+] andy_herbert|13 years ago|reply
I'm no zealot, but arguably it's always time for an open alternative to any service or product.
[+] jiaaro|13 years ago|reply
I like the idea of a 501c3 twitter competitor. It would be like wikipedia business-wise I guess.

Centralization has it's benefits, and they could be maintained without all the crap that's happening with twitter right now.

[+] cdcarter|13 years ago|reply
A 501c3 twitter is almost a brilliant solution. What grantmaker wouldn't want to support an organization dedicated to people's speech and open journalism? Valuing extensibility, openness, and free access, the mission is strong and the market is there. If Caldwell wanted to move this way, and offer $50 sustaining memberships for new features and $100 memberships for developers, nobody would blame him and all of a sudden he's open to some amazing funding opportunities.
[+] eddy23|13 years ago|reply
from http://www.thimbl.net/ "Thimbl, the free, open source, distributed micro-blogging platform. If you're weary of corporations hi-jacking your updates to make money, or if being locked in to one micro-blogging platform tires you — well, then Thimbl is for you!"

http://www.thimbl.net/faq.html "Isn't this just like identi.ca/ostatus.net?

The similarity is only superficial, in that we draw upon similarities with web2.0 platforms in how we communicate our use-case.

Diaspora, Crabgrass, NoseRub, StatusNet, identi.ca and the rest are just web-apps with some sort of federation bolted-on. None of them are truly distributed multi-tier systems like the classic internet applications such as email, usenet, irc, or finger. Thimbl, on the other hand, is just a finger & SSH client that illustrates that "microblogging" has already been possible on the internet for decades. It's done by simply presenting the data differently and making it look like the now-familiar Twitter interface. You don't need anything from the Thimbl project running on your server to participate in Thimbl, just the software that is already in your repository - namely SSH and xinetd/finger or compatible alternatives."

[+] bencevans|13 years ago|reply
We need something along the lines of Diaspora (Open and Distributed). This would encourage geeks to develop on the platform due to it being distributed it would be hard/impossible to shutdown thus shall be around for ever (Twitter might not be). And due to the openness of the codebase etc people would start setting up hosts (Just like Wordpress or Diaspora etc.)
[+] mhurron|13 years ago|reply
Because Diaspora has done so well.

The number of people that care about why Diaspora exists and why a Twitter clone in the same vein would exist is extremely small. Small userbase means the service is basically dead on arrival.

[+] jv22222|13 years ago|reply
Are you thinking something like Wordpress meets Twitter?
[+] anuraj|13 years ago|reply
My best wishes. Will contribute by code and kind. And the day such a service exists, I am closing my twitter accounts.
[+] Shish2k|13 years ago|reply
I wonder how hard it would be to add a stalking function to an IRC server, so you can follow someone and see all their public messages; and then log messages so recent chat can be viewed by looking at a channel... are there any other reasons to use twitter over IRC? :P
[+] cdcarter|13 years ago|reply
Wouldn't you always have to be connected, that way?
[+] brianfryer|13 years ago|reply
And Automattic is the company to build it.
[+] lucian303|13 years ago|reply
"How can one commercial company be allowed to own a protocol such as http or email?"

Twitter's "protocol" is not a protocol but an API that runs on top of HTTP and they created it. The ONLY responsibility Twitter has as a corporation is to do whatever it takes to make the largest profit. If it failed at this, it would actually be in violation of the law as that is the purpose of a corporation.

The world isn't entitled to anything Twitter builds.

[+] icebraining|13 years ago|reply
You're missing the point amidst your rage. The author means protocol as an abstract mechanism, not a specific implementation. Email is not a specific protocol either - I can receive email using JSON over HTTP - but a abstract mechanism that is implemented by a collection of those.

And that's not Twitter irresponsibility; its responsibility is to do whatever its owners want it to, following the law. Especially since it's a private company, not a public one.

The world isn't entitled to anything Twitter builds.

Nobody says it is. The article is saying that Twitter is not entitled to be the sole mechanism for distributing Twit-like messages, and that we should build and use a different one.