7 ms·
It might be some confirmation bias here on my part but it feels as if companies are becoming more and more hostile to their API users. Recently Spotify basicall
by bilekas 8mo ago
It might be some confirmation bias here on my part but it feels as if companies are becoming more and more hostile to their API users. Recently Spotify basically nuked their API with zero urgency to fix it, redit has a whole convoluted npm package your obliged to use to create a bot, Facebook requires you to provide registered company and tax details even for development with some permissions. Am I just old man screaming at cloud about APIs used to being actually useful and intuitive?
- cryptoegorophy 8mo agoCan you sell ads via api? If answer is no then this “feature” would be at the bottom of the list
- 3D30497420 8mo agoPlus, use of the API is a way to avoid ads. So double-strike against good/available APIs.
- prinny_ 8mo agoThere is a world where approaches like HTTP 402 are implemented to monetize API usage.
- rawling 8mo agoPlease get this token signed by our ad partner to enable your next ten requests.
- input_sh 8mo agoThey can sell API access via transparent pricing. Instead, many, many websites (especially in the music industry) have some sort of funky API that you can only get access to if you have enough online clout. Very few are transparent about what "enough clout" even means or how much it'd cost you, and there's like an entire industry of third-party API resellers that cost like 10x more than if you went straight to the source. But you can't, because you first have to fulfill some arbitrary criteria that you can't even know about ahead of time. It's all very frustrating to deal with.
- miroljub 8mo agoOf course they can [1]. Though, in this case, you get free API access to the model. [1]: https://x.com/badlogicgames/status/2017063228094709771 https://x.com/badlogicgames/status/2017063228094709771
- admx8 8mo agoWhat kind of ads they sell in terminal Claude code? Are you bor?
- simianwords 8mo agoI’m predicting that there would be a new movement to make everything an MCP. It’s now easier to consume an api by non technical people.
- sbarre 8mo agoEvery garden eventually becomes a walled garden once enough people are inside.
- miroljub 8mo ago[flagged]
- notrealyme123 8mo agoWhat a weird metaphor for a company which most likely wants nothing more than growing markets.
- b40d-48b2-979e 8mo agoIt's not a metaphor at all, just racism.
- miroljub 8mo ago[flagged]
- butlike 8mo ago#earthisamoat
- a10c 8mo agoEnshittification
- mamami 8mo agoI don't it's particularly hard to figure it out: APIs have been particularly at risk of being exploited for negative purposes due the explosion of AI powered bots
- throwaway24778 8mo agoThis trend well predates widespread use of chatbots.
- pirsquare 8mo agoFacebook doing that is actually good, to protect consumers from data abuse after incidents like cambridge analytica. They are holding businesses who touches your personal data responsible.
- wiseowise 8mo agoIs it? I’ve never touched Facebook api, but it sounds ridiculous that you need to provide tax details for DEVELOPMENT. Can’t they implement some kind of a sandbox with dummy data?
- beAbU 8mo agoWhatsApp takes bot spam very very seriously, and as a result, there is zero bot spam. Before you can sign up to build a WhatsApp bot, you need to jump through a million hoops, and after that, every automated message template must be vetted by Meta before it can be sent out, apple style. I'm glad of this, because unlike SMS and other messaging platforms, WhatsApp is spam free and a pleasure to use.
- bilekas 8mo ago> WhatsApp is spam free and a pleasure to use. At least here in Italy whatsapp is a spam house unless you actively update the default privacy settings in-app. There is no discernable difference between SMS and WhatsApp to spammers.
- msh 8mo agoWhatsApp is certainly not spam free. I get spam over WhatsApp, less than on telegram but still more than zero.
- closewith 8mo agoYou can mock their API all you want for development and there are many pre-built options for that, but it you want to touch their systems, they're sending a very clear signal. You must be a corporate with an RBO. Seems prudent to me.
- 8mo ago
- matdehaast 8mo agoSpotify are probably reacting to https://annas-archive.li/blog/backing-up-spotify.html https://annas-archive.li/blog/backing-up-spotify.html where basically the whole archive was downloaded
- notrealyme123 8mo agothat was later.
- throwaway920102 8mo agoIt was known publicly later.
- Loic 8mo agoThey put no limits on the API usage, as long as you pay. Here, they put limits on the "under-cover" use of the subscription. If they can provide a relatively cheap subscription against the direct API use, this is because they can control the stuff end-to-end, the application running on your system (Claude Code, Claude Desktop) and their systems. As you subscribe to these plans, this is the "contract", you can use only through their tools. If you want full freedom, use the API, with a per token pricing. For me, this is fair.
- arghwhat 8mo agoTheir subscriptions aren't cheap, and it has nothing really to do with them controlling the system. It's just price differentiation - they know consumers are price sensitive, and that companies wanting to use their APIs to build products so they can slap AI on their portfolio and get access to AI-related investor money can be milked. On the consumer-facing front, they live off branding and if you're not using claude code, you might not associate the tool with Anthropic, which means losing publicity that drives API sales.
- throwaway24778 8mo agoI don't and would never pay for an LLM, but presumably they also want for force ads down your throat eventually, yea? Hard to do if you're just selling API access.
- k8sToGo 8mo agoCompared to the heavily subsidized subscriptions, I don't think API is sold at loss. Also why would you create a throwaway for this question? Are you trying to rage bait?
- bilekas 8mo ago> Also why would you create a throwaway for this question? Are you trying to rage bait? You should never question anyone's route to privacy :)
- throwaway24778 8mo ago
- mdrzn 8mo agoAPIs are the best when they let you move data out and build cool stuff on top. A lot of big platforms do not really want that anymore. They want the data to stay inside their silo so access gets slower harder and more locked down. So you are not just yelling at the cloud this feels pretty intentional.
- sceptic123 8mo agoIt's just the continued slow death of the open internet
- mmasu 8mo agoI think that these companies are understanding that as the barrier to entry to build a frontend gets lower and lower, APIs will become the real moat. If you move away from their UI they will lose ad revenue, viewer stats, in short the ability to optimize how to harness your full attention. It would be great to have some stats on hand and see if and how much active API user has increased decreased in the last two years, as I would not be surprised if it had increased at a much faster pace than in the past.
- whiplash451 8mo ago> the barrier to entry to build a frontend gets lower My impression is the opposite: frontend/UI/UX is where the moat is growing because that's where users will (1) consume ads (2) orchestrate their agents.
- mmasu 8mo agoI agree with you - we are saying the same thing, by restricting their API or making less developer friendly, they want you to be captive in their UI. This might not be true for Anthropic or OpenAI - another child commenter made a comment about ads in CLI, I would not be surprised if in a while we will have product placements in LLM responses exactly as we have it in movies - not a plain ad but just a slightly less subliminal suggestion.
- whiplash451 8mo agoI don't think we'll get ads in the enterprise version. There will be ads for individuals and usual business pricing for businesses. I just think that OAI/Anthropic will try to keep both types of users locked into their walled garden via the UI. The APIs may have a future, but at our own peril and zero guarantees. It's a tool to create traction and demonstrate capabilities to devs.
- tomasphan 8mo agoIt’s objectively easier to build a frontend now and therefore that moat is disappearing. What you can argue is the moat is in incumbent advantage at the UI layer, not the UI itself.
- jauntywundrkind 8mo agoThis is sort of true! Spotify in particular is just patently the very worst. They released an amazing and delightful app sdk, allowing for making really neat apps in the desktop app in 2011. Then cancelled it by 2014. It feels like their entire ecosystem has only ever gone downhill. Their car device was cancelled nearly immediately. Every API just gets worse and worse. Remarkable to see a company have only ever such a downward slide. The Spotify Graveyard is, imo, a place of singnificantly less honor than the Google Graveyard. https://web.archive.org/web/20141104154131/https://gigaom.com/2014/11/03/spotify-kills-its-app-platform-three-years-after-its-launch/ https://web.archive.org/web/20141104154131/https://gigaom.co... But also, I feel like this broad repulsive trend is such an untenable position now that AI is here. Trying to make your app an isolated disconnected service is a suicide pact. Some companies will figure out how to defend their moat, but generally people are going to prefer apps that allow them to use the app as they want, increasingly, over time. And they are not going to be stopped even if you do try to control terms! Were I a smart engaged company, I'd be trying to build WebMCP access as soon as possible. Adoption will be slow, this isn't happening fast, but people who can mix human + agent activity on your site are going to be delighted by the experience, and that you will spread! WebMCP is better IMHO than conventional APIs because it layers into the experience you are already having. It's not a separate channel; it can build and use the session state of your browsing to do the things. That's a huge boon for users.
- TZubiri 8mo agoBut this ban is precisely on circumventing the API.
- whiplash451 8mo agoAPIs leak profit and control vs their counterpart SDK/platforms. Service providers use them to bootstrap traffic/brand, but will always do everything they can to reduce their usage or sunset them entirely if possible.
- iamacyborg 8mo agoGiven the Cambridge Analytica scandal, I don’t take too much issue to FB making their APIs a little tougher to use
- windexh8er 8mo agoEveryone has heard the word "enshittification" at this point and this falls in line. But if you haven't read the book [0] it's a great deep dive into the topical area. But the real issue is that these companies, once they have any market leverage, do things in their best interest to protect the little bit of moat they've acquired. [0] https://www.mcdbooks.com/books/enshittification https://www.mcdbooks.com/books/enshittification
- baby 8mo agoNot sure how relevant this comment is
- nananana9 8mo agoSee [1] for a solution. [1] https://i.programmerhumor.io/2025/03/778c56a79115a582edb9949e4368a20a.jpg https://i.programmerhumor.io/2025/03/778c56a79115a582edb9949...
- BoredPositron 8mo agoThere is no moat except market saturation and gate keeping for most platforms.
- xnx 8mo agoWhat is given can be taken away. Despite the extra difficult this is why unofficial methods (e.g. scraping) are often superior. Soon we'll see more fully independent data scraping done by cameras and microphones.
- canibal 8mo agoYou're not wrong. Reddit & Elon started it and everyone laughed at them and made a stink. But my guess is the "last dying gasp of the freeloader" /s wasn't enough to dissuade other companies from jumping on the bandwagon, cause fiduciary responsibility to shareholders reigns supreme at the end of the day.
- endymi0n 8mo ago„Open Access APIs are like a subway. You use them to capture a market and then you get out.“ — Erdogan, probably.
- systemBuilder 8mo agoGoogle now wants $30,000 a month for customsearch (minimum charge), up from 1c per search or thereabouts in January 2026...
- DataSpace 8mo agoYou're correct in your observations. In the age of agents, the walls are going up. APIs are no longer a value-add; they're a liability. MCP and the equivalent will be the norm interface. IMO.
- IAmGraydon 8mo agoIt's because AI is being trained on all of these APIs and the platforms are at risk of losing what makes them valuable (their data). So they have to take the API down or charge enough that it wouldn't be worth it for an AI.
- dakial1 8mo agoThat is not new, just new with APIs. The usual cycle with startups is to: - Start being very open, as this brings people developing over the platforms and generates growth - As long as they are growing, VC money will come to pay for everything. This is the scale up phase - Then comes the VC exit, IPO or whatever - Now the new owners don't want user growth, they want margin growth. This is the company phase - Companies then have monetize their users (why not ads?), close up free, or high-maintenance stuff that do not bring margin - and report that sweet $$$ growth quarter after quarter ...until a new startup comes in and starts the cycle over again, destroying all the value the old company had. A mix of Enshittification and Innovators Dilemma theories
- theshrike79 8mo ago"Are becoming", you sweet summer child. It all started with Facebook closing pretty much everything and making FB Messenger a custom protocol instead of XMPP. And whatever API access is still available is so shit and badly managed that even a household name billion dollar gaming company couldn't get a fast-lane for approval to use specific API endpoints. The final straw was Twitter effectively closing up their API "to protect from bots", which in fact did NOT protect anyone from bots. All it did was prevent legitimate entertaining and silly bots from acting on the platform, the actual state-controlled trolls just bought the blue checkmark and continued as-is.