Please remove all postings where you display code for connecting to Cleverbot and Jabberwacky

[GoogleCodeExporter]

An Email I received from Rollo Carpenter (rollo@cleverbot.com):

Please remove all postings where you display code for connecting to Cleverbot 
and Jabberwacky. There is no public API, and it is clearly stated that no 
access is granted. Serving the AI is complex, costly and not supported by any 
funding.
Rollo
Cleverbot.com

Original issue reported on code.google.com by pierredavidbelanger@gmail.com on 12 Dec 2011 at 5:59

[GoogleCodeExporter]

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]

[deleted comment]

[GoogleCodeExporter]

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]

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.com

Original comment by pierredavidbelanger@gmail.com on 13 Dec 2011 at 4:05

[GoogleCodeExporter]

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]

[deleted comment]

[GoogleCodeExporter]

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]

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