zlacker

>>stanis+(OP)
I don't really understand why it had to be this way. It's so easy to think of other ways this could have been handled. Even just announcing the same change with 6 months of lead time rather than 1 month would have gone over better. Or boil the frog and gradually introduce API restrictions. It's as if the CEO is purposefully being as belligerent as possible to rile people up.

>>extr+k4
You go the twitter way.

Just cap all existing API keys to roughly the number of users they currently have.

Everyone who is currently using RIF or Apollo or $whatever can continue to use it. They can't add any new users.

Super simple, nobody is losing anything, nobody is having anything taken away. All new users would be fed into the app. Eventually the 3rd party apps would have died off. It would have been a slow, painful and QUIET death.

>>AdamJa+1a
Twitter capped the third party apps ages ago, but they wouldn’t die. It was still a LOUD death when Musk finally cut them off.