Open GoogleCodeExporter opened 8 years ago
GoogleCodeExporter
commented
8 years ago My reply:
Ok, I have sadly hid everything (downloads, source code) in my project.
I just want to let you know that I made this project because I loved Cleverbot,
and wanted to let Cleverbot be widely used, by allowing developer to embed it
into their projects.
By absolutely no ways I meant harm to Cleverbot.Original comment by pierredavidbelanger@gmail.com on 12 Dec 2011 at 6:07
GoogleCodeExporter
commented
8 years ago [deleted comment]Mr. Farsen, thank you for your support.
I have forwarded your message to Mr. Carpenter.
I will post the reply here, if I receive one.Original comment by pierredavidbelanger@gmail.com on 13 Dec 2011 at 3:48
GoogleCodeExporter
commented
8 years ago Jarwain (via Pierre)
The fundamental reason is the same as why Google are now charging for
translation and other APIs, and Nuance and others charge for voice recognition:
because Cleverbot, and AI in general, uses very significant server resources
every time it responds. It costs real money (multiple 10s of 1000s of £ pa),
and a huge amount of time to maintain. Huge databases are very hard to serve.
Most people are used to web transactions taking a few milliseconds of server
time. Every Cleverbot interaction takes between 3 and 6 seconds of server time.
The difference is absolutely enormous.
It is simply not possible to allow people to use it for free. Cleverbot.com
generates at least some advertising revenue, and the app a small amount per
device.
If there is an official API, which does exist but is not public, it will have
to be charged for per interaction. How much would it be worth to you? How do
you wish to use it?
Rollo
Cleverbot.comOriginal comment by pierredavidbelanger@gmail.com on 13 Dec 2011 at 4:05
GoogleCodeExporter
commented
8 years ago Losing ad revenue is probably the main reason. Though, in reply of having a
paid API, why not have an official API but making it lower priority than the
web interface, or have a limit, like x answers/hour? This would probably
satisfy some and those it doesn't can either use the web interface or pay for
API access??Original comment by galaxyAb...@gmail.com on 19 Dec 2011 at 7:53
GoogleCodeExporter
commented
8 years ago [deleted comment]Then open up your API to the public on a pay-per-request basis, and make some
money to support cleverbot's resources, instead of just whining about how much
cleverbot costs you Rollo.Original comment by fuck...@puahate.com on 25 Dec 2011 at 12:04
GoogleCodeExporter
commented
8 years ago Big deception here.
I thought it was a project designed to improve Computer Sciences (yes
Uppercase), and not a lucrative one.
However, I can understand the cost(s) of maintenance, server resources, etc..
We don't have official audited revenue papers which could prove the fact that
"it is simply not possible to allow people to use it for free" but I can
believe you.
Concerning Google, it's another entire story and cannot be compared to
Cleverbot, most of Google services including lot of APIs are free, and when
they charge for it as mentioned above, it's either (mainly) because more
features are available and/or less limitations are raised. Google with their
big revenue in many fields can also support these "free things" which confirm
it is not so easy for Cleverbot.
I'm thinking of few things now, I remember the buzz with BBC, how is it
possible that nobody would have propose a funding? I'm thinking of
governements, Universities, big companies (Google, Amazon, etc...), or even
your strong users base. Did you (even) ask Google for fund (I'm sure they will
like it from technical point of view, I have no idea from Business lines
though).
Another good example is Wikipedia, yes Knowledge must be free, sometimes
liberated.
Best,
AQ.Original comment by Aladin.Q...@gmail.com on 16 Jan 2012 at 2:24
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
pierredavidbelanger@gmail.comon 12 Dec 2011 at 5:59