• kinther@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    They really should have just found out what the 3rd party apps -COULD PAY-. If it covered the cost of their usage and there was some profit on the top, it would at least bring in some money. Based on what I read by the Apollo dev, there was back and forth communication about pricing for a while until he broke the news.

    It astounds me that they chose to cut them off entirely by offering impossible pricing. Isn’t some money better than no money?

    • Rhabuko@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It’s because the planned IPO. Allowing third party apps, that are better designed, show no ads and don’t collect the same amount of telemetry data (seriously the official app spies constantly for user data), doesn’t look good in the eyes of potential investors.

    • ultimate_question@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Others have speculated that the API pricing model is built around customers who want to use the data for AI training, not customers who want to build apps for public use. The $20M price tag is what they’re hoping a mega corp will pay for data access and don’t care about anyone who can’t afford that much. Some money is better than no money, but for a lot of people the “chance” at BIG money is better than some money lol

      • smithy46@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        If this is the case, I don’t understand why they wouldn’t just separate into tiers, where mass data usage to feed into a language model is priced differently than people legitimately using and contributing content to the site.