• nameless_prole@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    1 year ago

    I don’t really understand reddit’s angle here… Why would they provide zero cost API access to an app, as long as the developer of the app isn’t making a profit? Are they trying to act like that was the issue they had with these third party apps? That they e profitable?

    How does it make sense for them to allow an app for that reason?

    • Anomander@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      54
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s what Narwhal dev had publicly offered previously, there’s no firm confirmation that’s actually the deal and I’d be a little surprised if it was.

      I think Reddit chose to give them a sweetheart deal because they’re the worst competitor app, the dev had been least publicly critical of the API changes, and Reddit wants the PR value of an example case “proving” their API changes weren’t maliciously anticompetitive towards third-party apps.

      The fact that Narwhal has struck a deal now allows Reddit Inc to say “see! we do work with third party apps; it’s not that we’re bad, it’s that RIF and Apollo are big meanies who won’t cooperate!”

      • keeb420@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        If “cooperating” means getting bent over and shafted with a footlong dildo covered in rusty razor blades than I don’t blame them one bit.

        • Anomander@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          1 year ago

          Indirectly, that was some of my point.

          It looks strongly like one of two things has happened - either Narwhal took the knee and has accepted absolutely abysmal terms in order to remain in existence, or Reddit has offered them a better deal in private to keep them afloat - solely to use them as a PR example case.

          The only thing that seems unlikely is that they’re working under strict terms of the published agreement, otherwise IMO costs to users are functionally unfeasible.

      • niktemadur@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Which raises another question: are analysts and investors so stupid that they can’t read between the lines? Because this looks like using a bucket to douse a five-alarm fire.

        • Yook
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I doubt theyre reading anything. Those types of people probably never used reddit and dont care about any internal conflict going on there as long as adding it grows their portfolio

    • Kbin_space_program@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      They’ve been trying this entire time to reframe the argument into the app developers being the bad apples.

      By getting one scab to exist, they can work at that angle now better than they could before.

    • ngmi@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Sounds like breaking a lot of laws by limiting api access to specific companies

      • Cloudless@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It is not a public service. Deals are made between companies all the time, so I don’t see how this would break the law.