They don’t even want you to use the website I don’t think. They’ve even done experiments where they blocked people from using the mobile website. The more they want me to use their app, the more I want to avoid Reddit all together.

    • RandomDude
      link
      fedilink
      92 years ago

      Bang on. Can’t serve you ads if they can’t control what’s on your screen.

    • Parsley
      link
      fedilink
      82 years ago

      To them, loss of 3rd party users is insignificant because they’re users they weren’t able to monetize to begin with

      • ikiru
        link
        fedilink
        7
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        If that insignificant number is disproportionately active users and moderators, then they will significantly feel it.

        At least until they just have bots commenting, posting, and moderating.

        • @dogmuffins@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          32 years ago

          Everyone says that the loss of these 3rd party app users will destroy them, but I disagree. I don’t think that the quality of experience is as closely linked to profitability as most people think. Ad-Clicking viewers of cat gifs are blissfully unaware of the current fiasco.

    • @averagedrunk@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      22 years ago

      I’m pretty sure they could serve ads from the API if they wanted. However, telemetry data would be incomplete at best. Given that they’ve outright stated that they want to create “actionable conversations” out of people talking about products they like on Reddit that data could be incredibly valuable to marketing companies and astroturfers.

    • @darius@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      212 years ago

      To quote ljdawson, the dev of Sync for reddit: “Apart from crashes I don’t track shit.”

      He was asked how many API calls Sync’s users have on average. He simply couldn’t answer. That’s why we loved 3rd party apps.

  • m-p{3}
    link
    fedilink
    242 years ago

    The third-party API doesn’t let them see how people interact with the app, only what the user is accessing.

    It’s just to further monetize the user’s interactions and sell the data, because the executive team are greedy little pigboi.

    • @menanonico@vlemmy.net
      link
      fedilink
      102 years ago

      Correct. Mobile apps get privileged access on your device which they use to track you. They don’t want third-party apps having all that data.

    • @kadu@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      182 years ago

      Not only ads, but their app is the only one that supported their NFT system. And their Twitter Spaces clone. And their upcoming shorts feature. And so on. They desperately want to be every other social network, and that means copying features that are mobile-centric.

      • kalipike
        link
        fedilink
        192 years ago

        I really don’t get why all these social platforms try so hard to just be copies of each other. I like having diverse and different platforms for different things. Once they all started homogenizing, I really stopped using most social media.

        And when LinkedIn added their ripoff of Instagram Stories I was like…aaaaand that’s it for me. Why does a professional site need a stories feature?

        • @Kempeth@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          122 years ago

          Because companies don’t want money. They don’t want a lot of money. They want ALL the money. If another company has a feature that people like and use, then this company wants that money as well. So they either buy that other company or copy and push the feature in the hopes of converting users.

          This is why YouTube has these asinine shorts shoved into your layout. They know YT users don’t want them. This is why you can’t disable them. They know that another company makes money with shorts and they want it - so YOU are gonna use them goddammit.

          A third party YouTube app doesn’t have to show these shorts so YT wouldn’t be able to pressure their users into consuming that format.

          • kalipike
            link
            fedilink
            62 years ago

            I happen to like the shorts. I only wish your shirts subscriptions were separate from your regular subscriptions. Otherwise I don’t have any issues with it.

            However, I do know a lot of people do take issue with it, and that’s okay!

        • @kadu@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          10
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          That’s precisely what they don’t want. The modern fight isn’t directly for your money, but for your time.

          If you’re binge watching Netflix… You’re not playing a Nintendo game. If you’re playing a Nintendo game… You’re not listening to Spotify. Or going to the movie theater. And so on.

          For social media platforms it’s the same. People like short videos now? Well, if Facebook doesn’t add them to their app you’ll close it and go browse TikTok. In the next board meeting, executives are going to ask the team why the hell are they not working on adding short videos.

          It’s a vicious battle for your time, and then figuring out later how to monetize that attention. Usually ads.

          • kalipike
            link
            fedilink
            32 years ago

            It’s a good point, albeit a highly unfortunate one. No faster way to get me to spend less time in your app than to make it the same as all the others, you know?

        • @ChosenUndead15@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          62 years ago

          LinkedIn is the most stupid thing because it is a fucking job board that wants to play to be Facebook and is the most unnecesary thing in the world. Before the Instagram Stories clone they were already too far by adding like 20 other social network features that a page like LinkedIn doesn’t need.

          • kalipike
            link
            fedilink
            22 years ago

            Yeah they really took it downhill dramatically didn’t they?

        • alcoholic_chipmunk
          link
          fedilink
          42 years ago

          You see this in other industries as well. I think every business just wants to be Walmart and an airline at the same time.

          Then they would be selling literally everything, no one would shop anywhere else and their prices would adjust automagiclly based on the size of your wallet.

        • @Stumblinbear@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          2
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          A platform’s development is entirely in the hands of its userbase. If the users stay on the platform longer due to a change, they’ll make that change and keep it. It just so happens that humans like what humans like, so all social media tries to cater to the same things that humans like, which leads them to implementing the same features because it drives engagement. It’s a trend towards mediocrity.

          • kalipike
            link
            fedilink
            52 years ago

            I understand the logical concept here but struggle to really get it. As platforms do this homogenization, I lose interest in all of them. I’d far rather have several platforma that do one or two things really, really well instead of a bunch of platforms that do everything, but poorly.

            I like your comment about a trend toward mediocrity!

        • socialjusticewizard
          link
          fedilink
          1
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          This kind of feature creep was also common in the web2.0 days. Lots of forum plugins were basically “you can have a facebook profile and feed page and a twitter feed, but they’re all wish.com equivalents because they’re locally hosted and can only be seen by the other people on this forum”. These features were generally quite popular too, heck I installed a few on my own forum. Besides money and things, I think it’s enticing to want to make your site into a “one stop” site. Throw in the fact that these are all capitalist hegemons trying to become the next ring to rule them all, and I think you’ve got your answer.

          • kalipike
            link
            fedilink
            12 years ago

            For sure. Unfortunately that last bit there, I know is the answer. It just sucks!

      • @DrQuint@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        52 years ago

        I have to say, there’s something peak hilarious to imagining someone at redsit huffing and puffing that "THEY’RE NOT USING OUR NFT’s!

        • SanguinePar
          link
          fedilink
          32 years ago

          I hate, hate HATE shorts, especially on YouTube.

          For my work I sometimes produce 30-60 econd video clips and trying to show them to a client when YT insists on having them in the Shorts format is frustrating. I realise I can change the URL manually to override it, but it’s just so stupid. And it also means I can set a custom thumbnail, as Shorts desnt allow that.

          • @twistedtxb@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            12 years ago

            It all boils down to the way we consume media, but I feel that some platforms (like Reddit) isn’t meant at all for this.

          • Parsley
            link
            fedilink
            1
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            Tiktok and shorts are doing a number on people’s attention spans and dopamine reward system. I remember there was some brain activity MRI study about this before. I bet it’s even worse now. Especially on kids and teens with neuroplasticity (if I remember correctly neuroplasticity ends around age 25). Their brains will form differently.

            Not just shorts, but microtransactions and micro-rewards. Small bursts of dopamine, non-stop.

        • @DrQuint@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          1
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          And they do it in the most abhorrent manner ever: No timeline, no way to rewind, and hold-to-pause. And people keep making minute long shorts.

          I like YouTube shorts. I hate youtube short’s format. For that reason, I removed the shorts and won’t get them back until revanced adds the playback controls YouTube doesn’t.

          Reddit will be worse. Their engineers can’t make a video player that doesn’t download all video qualities at the same time, on a wasteful format. Their shorts feature will follow suit, it’ll be uber garbage.

  • @Glunkbor@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    242 years ago

    If they streamline how users get access to Reddit, then they get to determine what they see. Now the third-party apps will get killed, the access through mobile browsers will be limited with the idea to force users into the app, old-reddit will be gone at some point as well. And then Reddit can spam users with ads and also force users into buying premium services to see no/less ads. Since all alternative ways of using the website will be gone, people have to swallow that pill no matter how big it is.

  • Zamboniman
    link
    fedilink
    21
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Ads and tracking.

    So $$$.

    They can force-feed ads to you and track your every click and sell that gobs of data to companies using it to make more $$ and to further develop their tracking to make yet more $$$

    So, as always, the answer to such questions is: Money.

    • @ChemicalRascal@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      12 years ago

      The IPO is everything, I’m sure. So much of any valuation is entirely speculative, but the higher that speculation is the more money the stakeholders will be able to get out when they sell.

      Presumably spez is a major stakeholder, and if so, a short-term inflation of particular usage metrics would directly mean more dollars in his pocket when they sell. It doesn’t matter if it then all falls over in a heap, if the monetisation isn’t actually viable; he (and others) have already cashed out, and the folks who bought into the valuation are left holding the bag.

  • @LlamaSutra@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    112 years ago

    They don’t make money off of our regular interactions on the site. They make money by selling tracking packages of users to advertisers.

    In an app made by them, they can track so so much of what you do. Much much harder to get data from someone using a third-party app.

  • @Ozymati@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    72 years ago

    App is tied to phone, phone for the most part kills the idea of you being anon. Which means glorious glorious user data, and problem users with multiple accounts get nuked based on their device and inside the app they can serve you anything anyone pays them to serve and unlike browser based stuff there is noting you can do to prevent or pervert it.