> It made no sense to implement everything in one app.
WeChat would disagree [1].
There is definitely a place for payments in a social app. Combine that with potential for increased user adoption because of that ("please download signal so I can pay you easily") and I don't see this as inherently bad. But they should have used a reputable coin instead of some scammy pyramid token.
The fact that there is a separate service providing instant payments does nothing to disprove my point - being that payments within a chat app is useful, if not preferred, by millions in China and elsewhere.
What exactly is the rationale that makes payments within a chat app 'inferior' or 'unneeded' just because there are separate services available (e.g. Barclays' Pingit)?
WeChat would disagree [1].
There is definitely a place for payments in a social app. Combine that with potential for increased user adoption because of that ("please download signal so I can pay you easily") and I don't see this as inherently bad. But they should have used a reputable coin instead of some scammy pyramid token.
https://www.businessofapps.com/data/wechat-statistics/#:~:te....