Feed Ze Birds

[rogerver]

-------------------May 2016 Update---------------------
The alpha version is live at birds.bitcoin.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Who here remembers FeedZeBirds?


It was an amazing advertising platform on Twitter.
Anyone could compose a tweet and pay anyone else to retweet it for them.
All the payouts were in Bitcoin, and it worked amazingly well to spread ideas, and to get Bitcoins into the hands of new people.

For whatever reason, the previous site owners took it offline, but I absolutely loved this service and want to bring it back to life on Bitcoin.com
The original site operators gave me the source code, but I'm not sure how usable it is.

Is anyone interested in reviving or rebuilding this project?
Here is the original source code for anyone who wants to dive in: https://github.com/feedzebirds/fzb-drupal/

If so, please contact me.

I'm more than happy to pay to make it happen.

[LiteCoinGuy]

never heard of it before but it sounds like a great idea! (and the name is funny too )

iam sure we will find a dev for that one.

[bitkilo]

Sounds like a good idea but all i keep hearing lately is that twitter is close to dead. I don't use twitter so don't know how true this statement is but apparently twitter is not "cool" among the kids nowadays.

You know your getting old when you no longer know what is "cool"

[BitcoinXio]

I never heard of it until now but that is pretty cool site. It's too bad they took it offline. Just checking it out on the wayback machine, btc was worth $3USD!

https://web.archive.org/web/20111212212 ... birds.com/

It sounds like a great way to pay for tweets. You can essentially do this now on fiverr.com, where people do services for you for payments (and you can pay in bitcoin). Services range from everything, with lots of social media stuff too.

Edit: just thinking about this some more, I think it's a really good idea. It would be cool if the payouts were weighted by how many followers you have. For example if you have 100-500 followers, you may get .0005 btc per retweet, or if you have 501-2500 followers you may get .001 per retweet, or if you have 2500-10,000 followers you may get .002 btc per retweet, etc. That would be very interesting to me, I would certainly do some RT's!

The hard part would be not paying spammers, people with fake accounts, multiple accounts, etc just to get payments. You would have to qualify users, maybe only if they have 500 followers or more are they allowed to RT for example, and each account is only allowed a max of 2 RT's per day possibly. I think this would be the hardest part, writing in the rules to stop the spammers.

[LiteCoinGuy]

Sounds like a good idea but all i keep hearing lately is that twitter is close to dead. I don't use twitter so don't know how true this statement is but apparently twitter is not "cool" among the kids nowadays.

You know your getting old when you no longer know what is "cool"

"dead"

[rogerver]

The payouts for the original service was based on the number of followers. The bidding was based on the price per 1K followers the message is tweeted to.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[nandibear]

FeedZeBirds.com back in 2011 (when BTC was = $2.43) -

[rogerver]

For Feedzebirds, how does this look like:

* User adds tweet on the webpage. Sets a price per retweet.
* Webpage generates a Bitcoin address from BIP32 pubkey, shows QR code to user.
* When bitcoin balance for that Tweet is >0, start checking retweets.
* Query Twitter API for retweets
- Get all retweets (https://api.twitter.com/1.1/statuses/retweets/:id.json)
- Check if user is not a bot.
- User can claim bitcoins by tweeting a bitcoin address to @FeedTheBirdsClaim.
- If retweeter has a bitcoin address in his description, send it there automatically.

Is there anything I missed?

In the previous system, people were paying for tweets, not re-tweets.
A unique identifier was included with each proposed tweet so that the system could recognize relevant tweets.
The end result was that people were tweeting the message from their own twitter account, not just retweeting someone else's.

Do people have a preference on tweets vs re-tweets?
Any other suggestions on what should be implemented?

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

For Feedzebirds, how does this look like:

* User adds tweet on the webpage. Sets a price per retweet.
* Webpage generates a Bitcoin address from BIP32 pubkey, shows QR code to user.
* When bitcoin balance for that Tweet is >0, start checking retweets.
* Query Twitter API for retweets
- Get all retweets (https://api.twitter.com/1.1/statuses/retweets/:id.json)
- Check if user is not a bot.
- User can claim bitcoins by tweeting a bitcoin address to @FeedTheBirdsClaim.
- If retweeter has a bitcoin address in his description, send it there automatically.

Is there anything I missed?

In the previous system, people were paying for tweets, not re-tweets.
A unique identifier was included with each proposed tweet so that the system could recognize relevant tweets.
The end result was that people were tweeting the message from their own twitter account, not just retweeting someone else's.

Do people have a preference on tweets vs re-tweets?
Any other suggestions on what should be implemented?

Just get it up so I can try it out

Er wait, that sounds a tad pervy

[BitcoinXio]

For Feedzebirds, how does this look like:

* User adds tweet on the webpage. Sets a price per retweet.
* Webpage generates a Bitcoin address from BIP32 pubkey, shows QR code to user.
* When bitcoin balance for that Tweet is >0, start checking retweets.
* Query Twitter API for retweets
- Get all retweets (https://api.twitter.com/1.1/statuses/retweets/:id.json)
- Check if user is not a bot.
- User can claim bitcoins by tweeting a bitcoin address to @FeedTheBirdsClaim.
- If retweeter has a bitcoin address in his description, send it there automatically.

Is there anything I missed?

In the previous system, people were paying for tweets, not re-tweets.
A unique identifier was included with each proposed tweet so that the system could recognize relevant tweets.
The end result was that people were tweeting the message from their own twitter account, not just retweeting someone else's.

Do people have a preference on tweets vs re-tweets?
Any other suggestions on what should be implemented?

I think a correctly marketed tweet would be better served by being retweeted versus someone else tweeting out some random link. Retweeting many times a single tweet gives that tweet more weight in the Twitter algo and therefor it will rise to the top of people's feed. In addition it will give that person who tweeted it some more visibility. You want to stay away from just random people or even bots just tweeting out junk when their entire followers may be bots too. Their tweets could have no weight at all. Someone who is legit getting lots of retweets would hold more weight.

[rogerver]

I think a correctly marketed tweet would be better served by being retweeted versus someone else tweeting out some random link. Retweeting many times a single tweet gives that tweet more weight in the Twitter algo and therefor it will rise to the top of people's feed. In addition it will give that person who tweeted it some more visibility. You want to stay away from just random people or even bots just tweeting out junk when their entire followers may be bots too. Their tweets could have no weight at all. Someone who is legit getting lots of retweets would hold more weight.

Great points.
I actually think we can set it up so the person paying gets to decide if it is for unique tweets, or retweets of a single tweet.

[kingscrown]

Never seen it but looks great. Twitter advertizing is big

[rogerver]

Here is the original source code for anyone who wants to dive in: https://github.com/feedzebirds/fzb-drupal/

[arnoudk]

Looks quite doable. It is just PHP and MySQL. I'm sure many things are broken as it has not been maintained.

I could not find any license agreement. Does this mean that we need to get permission from the author(s) first?

Also, there will be some security related work. I just opened a few php files, and the code is written in such a way that it is potentially vulnerable to MySQL injection attacks.

Code: Select all

$insert = "INSERT INTO bitcoin_address (cid, uid, address, received, is_public, server) VALUES(0". ", 0, '".$value."', 0, 0, 2)"; db_query($insert);

I am not sure if there are any other checks to ensure that no 'garbage' gets placed in $value - I have not checked. But this code is not written with the defense in depth mentality. Or, as Gavin Andresen likes to call it, with the belt AND suspenders approach.

@roger - if you are willing to take the risk on the license front, I'm willing to have a go!

[nandibear]

Looks quite doable. It is just PHP and MySQL. I'm sure many things are broken as it has not been maintained.

I could not find any license agreement. Does this mean that we need to get permission from the author(s) first?

Also, there will be some security related work. I just opened a few php files, and the code is written in such a way that it is potentially vulnerable to MySQL injection attacks.

[code] $insert = "INSERT INTO bitcoin_address (cid, uid, address, received, is_public, server) VALUES(0".
", 0, '".$value."', 0, 0, 2)";
db_query($insert);[/code]
I am not sure if there are any other checks to ensure that no 'garbage' gets placed in $value - I have not checked. But this code is not written with the defense in depth mentality. Or, as Gavin Andresen likes to call it, with the belt AND suspenders approach.

@roger - if you are willing to take the risk on the license front, I'm willing to have a go!

@arnoudk

Would something like this work:

Code: Select all

$q = "INSERT INTO bitcoin_address (cid, uid, address, received, is_public, server) VALUES (:cid, :uid, :address, :received, :is_public, :server);"; $query = $dbh->prepare($q); $results = $query->execute(array( ":cid" => $cid, ":uid" => $uid, ":address" => $address, ":received" => $received, ":is_public" => $is_public, ":server" => $server ));

[Sjors]

Looks like a pretty small code base. The hard part is finding a good developer who likes the idea. Adding PHP + Drupal as constraints makes that search more difficult. He or she should be able to rewrite the whole thing in their favorite modern framework quickly, reusing bits and pieces as needed.

[Acidyo]

What about renaming it to feedthetweet? feeddattweet#

[rogerver]

I'm actually hoping to rebrand it into Bitcoin.com somehow. Any ideas for the new branding?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Acidyo]

I'm actually hoping to rebrand it into Bitcoin.com somehow. Any ideas for the new branding?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Something that rhymes and comes easy off your mouth and gets easily imprinted in your brain. Hmmm.. bittweet? tweetbits?

Is using the word tweet against any rules/licences from twitter?

[nandibear]

How's this look -

[kingscrown]

How's this look -

Looks great IMO!

[throughnothing]

Unfortunately it seems like Twitter shut them down (by revoking their OAuth access to their application, which limits ability to get access to tweet information).

Anyone have any ideas on how a new version could get around this, or maybe have a better chance at fitting into twitters rules somehow?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=60007.0

[nandibear]

Unfortunately it seems like Twitter shut them down (by revoking their OAuth access to their application, which limits ability to get access to tweet information).

Anyone have any ideas on how a new version could get around this, or maybe have a better chance at fitting into twitters rules somehow?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=60007.0

If you look at the 2nd and 3rd pages of the bitcointalk.org thread which you've cited you'll see comments indicating that they solved the problem just one week later.

bearbones - January 26th 2012 - Got a notice today from Twitter that all we needed to do was add "#spon" to each of our campaigns. I've done this, and they've re-enabled our application!

and

evoorhees - February 1st 2012 - Back Online!

and also the notice in that very same thread of a new thread titled -

FeedZeBirds Flies Again! - Reactivated and Online

and if that isn't enough there's also evidence of FeedZeBirds.com being functional eight (8) months later -

November 2012 - https://web.archive.org/web/20121107031 ... birds.com/

and even into the following year 2013 -

January 2013 - https://web.archive.org/web/20130103100 ... birds.com/

[nandibear]

It seems that what may have finally and officially brought down FeedZeBirds.com was the SEC (U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission) in 2014.

It appears (view PDF) that the SEC alleged that in or around May 2012 that purported co-owner Erik Voorhees allegedly began selling 'shares' of FeedZeBirds -

...

7. Also on May 21, 2012, the website FreedomsPhoenix.com posted the following announcement titled “FeedZeBirds IPO”: FeedZeBirds is proud to announce that you can now own a piece of feedzebirds.com. On Thursday, May 24, at 15:30 EST FeedZeBirds will release 30% of the company as 30,000 shares on GLBSE, the Bitcoin stock exchange …. A share will be sold at 0.08667 BTC each.”

...

20. As a result of the conduct described above, Voorhees violated Sections 5(a) and 5(c) of the Securities Act, which prohibit the direct or indirect sale of securities, offer to sell or offer to buy securities through the mails or interstate commerce unless a registration statement has been filed or is in effect.


...

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

It seems that what may have finally and officially brought down FeedZeBirds.com was the SEC (U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission) in 2014.

It appears (view PDF) that the SEC alleged that in or around May 2012 that purported co-owner Erik Voorhees allegedly began selling 'shares' of FeedZeBirds -

...

7. Also on May 21, 2012, the website FreedomsPhoenix.com posted the following announcement titled “FeedZeBirds IPO”: FeedZeBirds is proud to announce that you can now own a piece of feedzebirds.com. On Thursday, May 24, at 15:30 EST FeedZeBirds will release 30% of the company as 30,000 shares on GLBSE, the Bitcoin stock exchange …. A share will be sold at 0.08667 BTC each.”

...

20. As a result of the conduct described above, Voorhees violated Sections 5(a) and 5(c) of the Securities Act, which prohibit the direct or indirect sale of securities, offer to sell or offer to buy securities through the mails or interstate commerce unless a registration statement has been filed or is in effect.


...

Lesson learned - pay the $50K fine and file registration statements. Depending on the type of securities for sale, you can circumvent this registration requirement in some cases.

Best to speak to a securities lawyer before and after!

[arnoudk]

Just don't have any links to the USA.

Don't develop it in the USA. Don't run it in the USA. Don't own it by a USA entity. Don't have USA residents involved in any way. Don't offer it to USA residents. Don't use USA currency. Don't use USA banks.

Too sad that the USA is a liability - but if it is: the world is bigger than the states.

The alternative is to file for all these permissions, open yourself up to all sorts of liabilities, and increase the cost for everyone.

[nandibear]

I advocate and support development of a new version of FeedZeBirds

It seems that the only 'unlawful' (if that's an accurate term) aspect of the site was the alleged addition (May 2012) to the site of unregulated selling of shares.

From what I've read on the forum here the objective for the new version is really and truly the original purpose of site which was paying/earning for retweets.

Moreover, I wanted to help with development of the new version. However:

(1) I'm not familiar with Drupal

(2) So I started writing some code (php, pdo) based on the original but I soon realized that I should leave this project to more adept coders. I don't want some chance of security vulnerabilities in my code to cost someone (or many persons) their bitcoins.

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

I advocate and support development of a new version of FeedZeBirds

It seems that the only 'unlawful' (if that's an accurate term) aspect of the site was the alleged addition (May 2012) to the site of unregulated selling of shares.

From what I've read on the forum here the objective for the new version is really and truly the original purpose of site which was paying/earning for retweets.

Moreover, I wanted to help with development of the new version. However:

(1) I'm not familiar with Drupal

(2) So I started writing some code (php, pdo) based on the original but I soon realized that I should leave this project to more adept coders. I don't want some chance of security vulnerabilities in my code to cost someone (or many persons) their bitcoins.

Exactly, nothing was wrong with the project itself besides a "rule" not being followed. Other than that, it was quite a successful campaign!

For any future legal questions, the best guys to talk to would be: http://www.srff.com

I do know attorneys that will take shares of your company to be your legal counsel, so if anyone is ever in this position - drop me a message and I will give you their contacts.

Knowledge is power and so we educate

[arnoudk]

I advocate and support development of a new version of FeedZeBirds

It seems that the only 'unlawful' (if that's an accurate term) aspect of the site was the alleged addition (May 2012) to the site of unregulated selling of shares.

From what I've read on the forum here the objective for the new version is really and truly the original purpose of site which was paying/earning for retweets.

Moreover, I wanted to help with development of the new version. However:

(1) I'm not familiar with Drupal

(2) So I started writing some code (php, pdo) based on the original but I soon realized that I should leave this project to more adept coders. I don't want some chance of security vulnerabilities in my code to cost someone (or many persons) their bitcoins.

Regarding managing bitcoins: the best way is to use 2/3 multisig, so that the server cannot possibly spend the bitcoins all by itself. Then, before payment, someone manually checks the transactions that the server creates. Only if these transactions make sense, will payment be done.

You could make clear that payments are done weekly and are manually checked.

Of course, use a hardware wallet, or an airgapped PC, to sign the transactions - otherwise your PC will become a target for attackers, too.

2/3 allows the spending of funds, in case someone loses a key.

Never develop a system where keys to spending the bitcoin are stored on the webserver. If you don't do that. you are (1) not as much a target, and (2) not at risk of losing funds if hacked.

[nandibear]

Back when FeedZeBirds was brand new.

Cofounders Ira Miller & Erick Voorhees on The Bitcoin Show (OnlyOneTV.com).

November 28, 2011

https://youtu.be/VuLAhZsFc1A