cross-posted from: https://sh.itjust.works/post/93361
APIs for content sites must be free (🔥 Score: 152+ in 2 hours)
Link: https://readhacker.news/s/5GSi2 Comments: https://readhacker.news/c/5GSi2
*I don’t mind a site charging a nominal fee for API access. Either to cover the cost of API service itself, or more importantly to encourage API developers to be efficient when making API requests. But that’s hundreds to thousands of dollars a year, not millions.
Important caveat about the title from the article.
Is there a reasonable model for commercial sites to survive if their APIs are free?
The obvious answer is “charge a reasonable price”.
Many services like AccuWeather do that, including having a limited free tier for experimentation or niche applications.
The real problem though is that the value of the data isn’t just the cost of storing and making it available - in many cases its strategic. This is why e.g. the Google Maps API gives you pre-rendered map tiles and curated results, but you don’t get access to the raw data.
I think that’s reasonable, which is why I’m wondering how “all APIs must be free” works.
Ads, like Reddit does and reddit makes a ton of money. If they weren’t trying to make nft integrations or new TikTok and just had the staff it took to keep the lights on, it would be a stable successful business.
But the greedy execs want more money so they act like they have no choice but to squeeze the users for everything they can. This is their choice, not a necessity.
Exactly this. They keep repeating that they aren’t profitable. But the key question is: why do they need 2,000 employees? IIRC, before they were acquired by Facebook, Whatsapp managed to handle a billion+ users with 50 people.
If I write a third party app, then I can filter out any ads you pass me, or I can make it easy for a user to do at arm’s length from me by allowing plugins. This is exactly what’s happening with reddit third party apps.
I don’t think it’s as black and white as you’re making out.
I would expect that not filtering ads (unless the user pays the content site) could be an enforceable stipulation to anyone using the APIs, no? I would also think that ads could be served through the common “get new posts” API in an opaque manner pretty easily.
Well if you violate TOS then your API key gets revoked. If apps want access then they can play by the rules; I think that’s fair enough.
Now, what’s fair when it comes to ad placement is a whole other can of worms…
Ads and also offer an ad-free option that gives you an API key. So, if you want to use a 3rd party app to skirt ads you’d still have to pay the website. I think charging the user is a much fairer system than charging developers for API access.
