3 ms·
Why ? Twitter is built around public communication. Why would I pay for encrypted private communication when I already use better existing solution for free ?
by Timshel 3y ago
Why ?
Twitter is built around public communication.
Why would I pay for encrypted private communication when I already use better existing solution for free ? And even if I pay it's useless unless others pay too (what a fail might have been interesting if it worked as soon as one party was verified).
With this feature they go from a shitty DM to a shitty sometime encrypted DM.
Wouldn't call this a nobrainer ...
- zimpenfish 3y ago> when I already use better existing solution for free ? The good thing about Twitter DMs is that they don't expose your phone number which means you can - reasonably safely - converse with strangers.
- madeofpalk 3y agoCompeltely depends on your threat matrix I guess. At the moment (encrypted) Twitter DMs requirements payment, so that's a risk in some kind to safety. It's reasonably trivial to get an anonymous prepaid phone number.
- diebeforei485 3y agoThere are many use cases. For example, a known government officials giving a tip to a journalist without giving them perpetual phone access. There is a lot more friction involved in getting an anonymous prepaid number, and them proving your identity. On Twitter those issues are solved.
- mjg59 3y agoTwitter's a terrible choice for that use case, since the metadata isn't encrypted and you can't create an account without tying it to something else.
- diebeforei485 3y agoThere is a time value in getting information out quick without having to create new accounts and re-verifying your identity. > the metadata isn't encrypted I wouldn't trust this if I was Snowden, but I would trust this if I was a corporate whistleblower and wanted to get information out to jousnalists as soon as possible.