[axod]

The other takeaway for me is that it was an insanely risky bet.

Twitter could easily have built the functionality to share pictures into twitter (Like facebook did). Heck - then they might have a reasonable revenue stream.

If Twitter had done that, twitpic would have been stomped on.

[abstractbill]

Right, but if the entire site really was about a week's worth of work (or anything like that order of magnitude) then I wouldn't say this was insanely risky, I'd say "why the hell would I not try this?" ;)

[gridspy]

Of course he was solving his own problem in the process - so worst case scenario : An educational programming experience that leads to a useful personal tool.

[wisty]

I wish I could vote twice, just occasionally.

[axod]

I'm guessing he didn't just write it then sit back and let it run. Things tend to need tweaking/maintainence/upgrading, especially if you're scaling to the numbers he has...

But I agree, why not try stuff like this... Might just work.

[emmett]

A very risky bet, with high payoff and low risk. AKA, a good bet.

Chance of Success * Reward - Cost. Just because the chance of success is low doesn't mean it's a bad idea.

[aaronblohowiak]

Very risky, yes. But it is chicken risk, not pig risk.

[Andys]

That to me is the real message from this: That twitter failed to implement and integrate this feature into their own service, and are missing out on a pretty decent revenue stream.

[FreeRadical]

But the revenue stream is advertising which they could turn on any time