Recently I've been working with the Twitter API quite a lot (can't explain why... ;nbsp;for now) and at face value, it's not the easiest thing to deal with. ;nbsp;Their API isn't terribly hard but it will add time to your project while you get to grips with it.

The Twitter API documentation is okay, but again, as with all APIs you'll spend a fair portion of your time interfacing with it. ;nbsp;However, I was recently pointed towards lab.arc90.com's Twitter API client which makes life somewhat easier.

Suddenly it's a case of instantiating the class with your username and password, as such:

$twitter = new Arc90_Service_Twitter('username', 'password'); ;nbsp;

Updating your Twitter status using the Arc90 client is a 4-lines-of-code affair, from start to finish. ;nbsp;Which makes life easy, tidy and more importantly quick. ;nbsp;

I thoroughly recommend investigating it if you're doing some development using the Twitter API. ;nbsp;Thanks to Stephen Beattie for finding and referring the client.;nbsp;

Recently I've been working with the Twitter API quite a lot (can't explain why... ;nbsp;for now) and at face value, it's not the easiest thing to deal with. ;nbsp;Their API isn't terribly hard but it will add time to your project while you get to grips with it.

The Twitter API documentation is okay, but again, as with all APIs you'll spend a fair portion of your time interfacing with it. ;nbsp;However, I was recently pointed towards lab.arc90.com's Twitter API client which makes life somewhat easier.

Suddenly it's a case of instantiating the class with your username and password, as such:

$twitter = new Arc90_Service_Twitter('username', 'password'); ;nbsp;

Updating your Twitter status using the Arc90 client is a 4-lines-of-code affair, from start to finish. ;nbsp;Which makes life easy, tidy and more importantly quick. ;nbsp;

I thoroughly recommend investigating it if you're doing some development using the Twitter API. ;nbsp;Thanks to Stephen Beattie for finding and referring the client.;nbsp;

It's common knowledge that pornography helped shape and grow the Internet. While it was founded as a means to share data and then rationalised as a good way for people to connect; human nature is always destined to take over and therefore adult sites started to pop up.

Previously premium cable/satelite channels were the only means for users to see adult content with printed media taking the backseat. However once the adult industry found its way online one of the biggest businesses in the history of mankind found a way to grow exponentially.

Porn helped grow the Internet
As the Internet gained in popularity, the number of adult oriented websites exploded exponentially and a business model was born; using the same subscription model used television, sites were established that allowed users to pay a fixed fee and have access to instant content.

Obviously as technology improved the adult industry followed - faster connections brought around an increase in video and said goodbye to premium-rate dialers. However, with the second dot-com boom (the often cited ;quot;web2.0 boom;quot;) the whole industry started to shift.

Web2.0 moved the goalposts dramatically
Web2.0 was a term banded around to represent user generated content and various forms of data syndication; it was obvious once Youtube became popular that a user-generated pornography video site wouldn't be far behind. User submitted content could then be uploaded to the site and served for free...

Suddenly sites such as Youporn, Pornotube and Redtube (to name the only three I am aware of) sprung up and changed the business model. Users could see all content, all the time. No subscriptions, no fees, just user submitted content.

Free content = no more paid subscriptions
Suddenly new subscriptions to premium paid services dwindled as users found comparable content for free on these new sites; which in turn spawned dozens of similar sites and moved the goalposts for the adult industry. So how can the conventional, premium sites still survive? I don't know. I can only imagine they survive by creating their own services and monetise them correctly (i.e. not with subscriptions but heavily promoted CPA campaigns).

So one of the core industries that helped found the Internet has had to adapt and shift with the times and there probably won't be a way back. Even if they clamp down on copyrighted material there's still such a volume of genuine user generated content (read amateur) footage that the damage is already done.

Pornography is free because of the web2.0 trend and the only battle for the adult industry is whether they can monopolise on the situation as they always have.

It's common knowledge that pornography helped shape and grow the Internet. While it was founded as a means to share data and then rationalised as a good way for people to connect; human nature is always destined to take over and therefore adult sites started to pop up.

Previously premium cable/satelite channels were the only means for users to see adult content with printed media taking the backseat. However once the adult industry found its way online one of the biggest businesses in the history of mankind found a way to grow exponentially.

Porn helped grow the Internet
As the Internet gained in popularity, the number of adult oriented websites exploded exponentially and a business model was born; using the same subscription model used television, sites were established that allowed users to pay a fixed fee and have access to instant content.

Obviously as technology improved the adult industry followed - faster connections brought around an increase in video and said goodbye to premium-rate dialers. However, with the second dot-com boom (the often cited ;quot;web2.0 boom;quot;) the whole industry started to shift.

Web2.0 moved the goalposts dramatically
Web2.0 was a term banded around to represent user generated content and various forms of data syndication; it was obvious once Youtube became popular that a user-generated pornography video site wouldn't be far behind. User submitted content could then be uploaded to the site and served for free...

Suddenly sites such as Youporn, Pornotube and Redtube (to name the only three I am aware of) sprung up and changed the business model. Users could see all content, all the time. No subscriptions, no fees, just user submitted content.

Free content = no more paid subscriptions
Suddenly new subscriptions to premium paid services dwindled as users found comparable content for free on these new sites; which in turn spawned dozens of similar sites and moved the goalposts for the adult industry. So how can the conventional, premium sites still survive? I don't know. I can only imagine they survive by creating their own services and monetise them correctly (i.e. not with subscriptions but heavily promoted CPA campaigns).

So one of the core industries that helped found the Internet has had to adapt and shift with the times and there probably won't be a way back. Even if they clamp down on copyrighted material there's still such a volume of genuine user generated content (read amateur) footage that the damage is already done.

Pornography is free because of the web2.0 trend and the only battle for the adult industry is whether they can monopolise on the situation as they always have.

Hosting is one of those aspects that you can't afford to not understand. One of the hardest things to do is compare hosts and combine them with user reviews; you put a lot of faith in hosts to deliver maximum uptime, decent customer service and realistic usage limits.;nbsp; To help raise awareness of their site, WebHostingChoice have paid for this sponsored review.

WebHostingChoice.com is a website dedicated to providing a direct comparison between a good number of US hosts. While the hosts are limited to being US only, the comparison chart on the homepage offers a reasonable indication as to how the hosts generally perform. Metrics such as price, setup costs, whether you get a free domain, bandwidth allowance, storage allowance and money back guarantee. There's also a ;quot;score;quot; assigned to each host.

Clicking through to read the review for each host allows you to see more information on the package offered; up-time guarantees, control panel, langauge support, SSL support and further breakdowns for costs.

It's comforting to see companies scored in such a way, but I'd like to see some reviews of how the hosts handle their customers - often customer support can make me go with a more expensive supplier simply because I know my account is handled properly. There's nothing worse than paying your bills and still feeling like an anonymous chump when something goes wrong.

WebHostingChoice don't cover *all* hosts, as my guys (Dreamhost) aren't included at all, so I wouldn't take it as impartial and complete.

The other reason that makes me question the advice is that most of the links are set up in a way that makes me believe it's affiliate generated - so clicking through to sign up with a host would profit WHC. While I'm entirely for people generating profit from their sites, it does make me raise an eyebrow as to whether ;quot;Host A;quot; is really the best or they're being touted as the best purely to increase the chance of an affiliate sale (when Host A offers a higher CPA than Host B).

Other than that the site is perfectly usable and helpful (albeit less than aesthetically glorious), the information is certainly a good starting point. I'd recommend taking the advice with a pinch of salt and reading more reviews before committing to a host.

Hosting is one of those aspects that you can't afford to not understand. One of the hardest things to do is compare hosts and combine them with user reviews; you put a lot of faith in hosts to deliver maximum uptime, decent customer service and realistic usage limits.;nbsp; To help raise awareness of their site, WebHostingChoice have paid for this sponsored review.

WebHostingChoice.com is a website dedicated to providing a direct comparison between a good number of US hosts. While the hosts are limited to being US only, the comparison chart on the homepage offers a reasonable indication as to how the hosts generally perform. Metrics such as price, setup costs, whether you get a free domain, bandwidth allowance, storage allowance and money back guarantee. There's also a ;quot;score;quot; assigned to each host.

Clicking through to read the review for each host allows you to see more information on the package offered; up-time guarantees, control panel, langauge support, SSL support and further breakdowns for costs.

It's comforting to see companies scored in such a way, but I'd like to see some reviews of how the hosts handle their customers - often customer support can make me go with a more expensive supplier simply because I know my account is handled properly. There's nothing worse than paying your bills and still feeling like an anonymous chump when something goes wrong.

WebHostingChoice don't cover *all* hosts, as my guys (Dreamhost) aren't included at all, so I wouldn't take it as impartial and complete.

The other reason that makes me question the advice is that most of the links are set up in a way that makes me believe it's affiliate generated - so clicking through to sign up with a host would profit WHC. While I'm entirely for people generating profit from their sites, it does make me raise an eyebrow as to whether ;quot;Host A;quot; is really the best or they're being touted as the best purely to increase the chance of an affiliate sale (when Host A offers a higher CPA than Host B).

Other than that the site is perfectly usable and helpful (albeit less than aesthetically glorious), the information is certainly a good starting point. I'd recommend taking the advice with a pinch of salt and reading more reviews before committing to a host.