Live data from Hacker News

Twitter’s $42k-per-month API prices out nearly everyone

wired.com

151–160 of 233 posts

Re: Twitter’s $42k-per-month API prices out nearly everyone

#151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Academics don't resell the data to others. In fact, their existing agreements with Twitter requires their published datasets (for reproducibility) to be anonymized precisely to ensure they don't become a commercial goldmine. Given that most of the article is about the pricing tiers for academic use, based on marketing communications to universities, your comment seems strangely indifferent to the context of this news…

Except if I want to buy some piece of academic research, they sell articles for as high at $60. Why aren’t academics complaining about the absurd costs for the public accessing their information?

They do? Every single academic in the country supports open-access, lobbies their institutions to pay for the costs of open access. Every researcher will send you a copy of their article if you are paywalled and want to read it. And you, like all academics, know about Sci-Hub, so you should do what most academics do and use Sci-Hub to pirate the article to begin with.

Re: Twitter’s $42k-per-month API prices out nearly everyone

#152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difficulty is, people can still scrape the data. That data scraping is likely to cost Twitter more than the API did, as they have to serve up the full page. Yes, you can try to block people doing that, but historically people haven't succeeded.

scrapping data at scale is much harder that you are making it sounds like. Especially is the company is trying hard to prevent that. Much cheaper just to pay for the api.

LinkedIn tries hard to prevent scraping, but there are third parties doing it, and then re-selling it. Each user is presumably paying a fraction of what the scraping cost.

Re: Twitter’s $42k-per-month API prices out nearly everyone

#153
post #113
post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The last time I talked to Twitter sales (about 2 years ago) they were asking for 6k/mo.

That is false. https://twitter.com/stokel/status/1634310536723668995?s=20

Thank you for reminding me why I dislike this place so much.

I've literally got the email right here: "As I mentioned on the phone, we structure them as a monthly subscription based on an annual agreement. Variables that affect pricing are the APIs you use to get data and the amount of data you consume each month. Our smallest packages fall between $5,000-$8,000 per month."

The price they quoted me, over the phone, was 6k. Doesn't mean we took it (we didn't) but that was what they were asking for. I know others that were paying 5k/mo.

And I know others who still had free accounts from way back in the day. Everyone is being swept up now.

Re: Twitter’s $42k-per-month API prices out nearly everyone

#154
post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are his viewpoints and how are they amplified considering anybody can post anything?

>What are his viewpoints Musk is very vocal about his far-right views. He's anti-union, anti-public health, etc. >how are they amplified considering anybody can post anything? Anyone can post anything, but Musk can and has systemically prioritized his tweets over organic content.

[dead]

Re: Twitter’s $42k-per-month API prices out nearly everyone

#155
post #24

All of these moves make sense when you zoom out and realize Musk has no interest in Twitter as a business. It is a megaphone to amplify his own voice and the voices that support his viewpoints. Having third party API consumers able to pull in content and reorder it other than how he wants it presented is counter to that goal. The genius of Fox News was "why spend money on buying political attack ads when you can just…

Also consistent with his stated goal of making the business profitable.

> Also consistent with his stated goal of making the business profitable.

It was profitable. He caused it to hurtle toward bankruptcy.

Re: Twitter’s $42k-per-month API prices out nearly everyone

#156
post #24

All of these moves make sense when you zoom out and realize Musk has no interest in Twitter as a business. It is a megaphone to amplify his own voice and the voices that support his viewpoints. Having third party API consumers able to pull in content and reorder it other than how he wants it presented is counter to that goal. The genius of Fox News was "why spend money on buying political attack ads when you can just…

> The genius of Fox News was "why spend money on buying political attack ads when you can just buy the network and run them all day long." No, that's a misunderstanding. What Fox News cares about is growing and maintaining an audience because that's what profitable. In pursuit of that profit, Fox News will foster its community however it can. And so, driven by profit seeking, Fox News has embraced total nihilism. Fox…

Why do we have to tell the people what they need to hear? Why can't we just tell them what they wanna hear?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWenPDBtMw4

Re: Twitter’s $42k-per-month API prices out nearly everyone

#157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except twitter won't pay the people who have created the data in the first place. So it's stopping short of actually paying your dues.

I dont expect to be paid for my content creation on facebook or instagram. Yt, for sure. I think it is fair to say this is a moving topic

[deleted]

Re: Twitter’s $42k-per-month API prices out nearly everyone

#158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

The white house wasn't even doing the same. The fbi was pointing out tweets that violated Twitter's rules and suggesting that they evaluate them but that it was totally up to Twitter about what to do. The white house was pointing out tweets that embarrassed or otherwise hurt Trump's feelings and demanding that Twitter take them down

Did the FBI manipulate Twitter into censoring the NY Post story on Hunter Biden's laptop?

Re: Twitter’s $42k-per-month API prices out nearly everyone

#159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Academics don't resell the data to others. In fact, their existing agreements with Twitter requires their published datasets (for reproducibility) to be anonymized precisely to ensure they don't become a commercial goldmine. Given that most of the article is about the pricing tiers for academic use, based on marketing communications to universities, your comment seems strangely indifferent to the context of this news…

Except if I want to buy some piece of academic research, they sell articles for as high at $60. Why aren’t academics complaining about the absurd costs for the public accessing their information?

Most academics (at least in Sweden). Get a lot of their articles from their University Library. Scihub is also an option if needed. If those options aren't possible then either request the library to buy it or to do it themselves. Besides it is way less than $43k.

Even then a lot of people are against the high cost

Re: Twitter’s $42k-per-month API prices out nearly everyone

#160
post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it's possible. But saying "guy that played himself into burning $44 billion on a website that makes no money, just so he could force all its users to read his shitposts" isn't the way. It just reveals their biases.

I don't know, that seems to be the apolitical reading of the situation. Is there something specific you object to in that quote? >guy that played himself into burning $44 billion That seems unquestionable. Twitter wasn't worth that price when he actually took control or he wouldn't have tried so hard to get out of the deal. It is impossible to put an accurate value on Twitter today, but it seems obvious that its valu…

> it hasn't turned a profit in years

Barring the $800M legal settlement which took them to $220M loss, they'd have made $580M profit in 2021. Things were definitely on the upswing.

Post reply on HN