X blocks API encouragement: The end of "earning money with your mouth" InfoFi

On the evening of January 15th, X officially revoked API access for InfoFi applications, causing a major shock in the crypto community. This event marks the end of an era—when developers could freely build independent incentive mechanisms on the X platform without platform approval. The market’s ripple reaction was very strong, with major related tokens recording double-digit declines within a few hours.

KAITO, COOKIE Plummet: The Immediate Impact of X’s Decision

Immediately after the policy announcement, the InfoFi market plunged into panic. Data shows:

KAITO is currently trading at $0.40, down 4.65% in the past 24 hours. Although the magnitude of the decline doesn’t seem too severe compared to the early days, it reflects persistent negative sentiment from investors.

COOKIE DAO token fell further, now at $0.03 with a 24-hour decrease of -5.01%. Both tokens show a continuous downward trend since the event, indicating deep uncertainty about the future of the InfoFi ecosystem.

However, numbers are not the only issue. What truly happened is that the entire economic model of an ecosystem has been called into question regarding its sustainability.

X’s Clear Denial: External Incentives Are No Longer Accepted

Nikita Bier, Head of Product at X, issued a statement with no ambiguity. The platform will not allow any application to continue accessing the API if they use incentive mechanisms to promote user posts. This is not a minor adjustment but a comprehensive rebuttal to the entire logic of InfoFi.

The official reason given by X is content quality issues. External incentive systems have led to a situation where tasks and templates flood the information stream, creating大量无价值内容，甚至由AI机器人生成的反馈。这严重影响了真实用户的体验。

But there is a significant detail in Nikita Bier’s statement: X emphasizes that previous InfoFi applications paid millions of USD in API fees to the platform, but X does not need this revenue. This statement is almost a critique of the true value of the InfoFi business model—it is not part of X’s future.

From Snaps to Yaps: InfoFi Projects Must Restructure

Reactions from major InfoFi projects reveal the shock level caused by this decision:

Cookie DAO—one of the leading projects in this space—announced the shutdown of its Snaps platform. This is described as a “difficult and sudden” decision, but not a complete abandonment. Instead, it aims to ensure their core data still complies with X’s policies. Cookie still emphasizes itself as an enterprise API client of X, but clearly, the direct incentive model is no longer feasible.

Kaito chose a different path—completely restructuring. They shut down the Yaps feature and incentive leaderboards, and launched Kaito Studio—a new platform operating under traditional content marketing logic. Instead of allowing anyone to design independent incentive systems, Kaito Studio now functions on a model where brands select creators based on predefined standards, and it will expand to platforms like YouTube and TikTok.

In Kaito’s explanation, they admit that even with higher thresholds and better filtering mechanisms, low-quality content remains an unavoidable issue in a fully open incentive model. They agree with X that “permissionless incentive distribution systems” are no longer suitable for common needs.

The Issue Is Not Content, But Incentive Mechanisms

Looking deeper into this decision, it becomes clear that X is not just removing spam content. The core issue is about control.

When external incentive systems are embedded directly into the platform, they effectively become an overlay that governs user interaction. Users no longer post because they want to share opinions, but because they want to earn tokens or points. Content is no longer evaluated based on informational value but on whether it satisfies “payable” conditions.

X realizes it is losing control over its own content order. For this reason, InfoFi projects are not just participants in the ecosystem needing reform; they are a content production pathway that the platform has decided can no longer exist.

In terms of handling, X is not trying to “fix” InfoFi. Instead, it clearly chooses to move it entirely out of its ecosystem, even suggesting projects switch to Threads or Bluesky. This is a clear statement: the era of “earning money with your mouth” has ended at X.

Conclusion: Ripple Effects and Ecosystem Restructuring

This event is significant not only for individual InfoFi projects but for the entire crypto ecosystem. It shows that Web2 platforms are increasingly defining what they will and will not accept within the crypto ecosystems built upon them.

Profit-driven projects based on unpermitted incentives will need to restructure or leave. The approach of relying on platform API systems, through external incentive mechanisms to directly motivate users, is now almost impossible to sustain. This is not a temporary policy adjustment—it’s a declaration of the boundaries that X is no longer willing to let third parties cross.