4 ms·
You depend on Twitter: 1. Staying up. 2. Not doing this themselves and leveraging their advantage of being able to take payments private (like direct messag
by calambrac 18y ago
You depend on Twitter:
1. Staying up.
2. Not doing this themselves and leveraging their advantage of being able to take payments private (like direct messages). What's the play if they do that, sue for abuse of monopoly?
Also, twitter has zero security. Just one quick scenario: Set up a search for twitpay, bag a list of usernames, start bruteforcing passwords, dump to an account, and cash out...
- deleted 18y ago[deleted]
- dbrown26 18y agoTwitpay is focusing on micropayments in order to alleviate some of the risk in using a medium like Twitter. A user can only put or take a maximum of $50 in or out of the system on one given day. So while that attack is theoretically possible, it would not be very lucrative. You would also have to ensure that the accounts that you have brute forced are funded.
- calambrac 18y agoAll the payments show up in the public twitter stream, so you know how much people theoretically have at any given time. The daily max is circumvented with sockpuppets. It doesn't have to be lucrative for someone to try it, or for it to ruin the whole idea. Other ways to ruin things: having trouble understanding the credit crisis? Create your own with twitpay. Just start twitpaying your friends and sockpuppet accounts in crazy, interlocking ways, but way underfund your accounts, then have everyone start making claims. Who gets paid!? I don't know! It's twitterific!
- reedjo 18y agoPaypal currently offers the ability to SMS payments. Why would I choose Twitpay over that SMS?