Users React To Bluesky's Upcoming Blue Check Mark Verification System (neowin.net)
- Reference: 0177062817
- News link: https://tech.slashdot.org/story/25/04/18/2231252/users-react-to-blueskys-upcoming-blue-check-mark-verification-system
- Source link: https://www.neowin.net/news/angry-disappointed-users-react-to-blueskys-upcoming-blue-check-mark-verification-system/
> There's a general worry that adding a visual badge, especially one controlled in part by Bluesky, feels too much like the centralized systems they were trying to escape from by joining Bluesky: "Do not want. BSky is not Twitter 2.0. Do not become like Elon Musk. We came here to get AWAY from that bs." Several commenters [5]also expressed that the current domain name system, while not perfect, is an elegant and decentralized way to build trust, and that adding this new layer feels redundant and gives too much power to centralized entities, including Bluesky itself: "Let's please not do this. Domain names as user IDs is an elegant solution as a system of trust that builds off the infrastructure of an open web."
>
> While the majority of the initial reaction seems negative, focusing on concerns about centralization and the value of the existing domain verification, there was some support for the idea of a visual badge, making it easier to quickly identify genuine accounts. [6]One user commented : "I support this change. I like someone to verify that the account is indeed genuine and the username field showing the domain isn't helpful that much... A badge makes it easier to just tick it off that it's genuine." The PR author, estrattonbailey, later added a description to the pull request explaining that the goal is a "stronger visual signal" for notable accounts and clarifying it's not a paid service.
[1] https://bsky.app/profile/alice.mosphere.at/post/3ln432tr7rc2y
[2] https://www.neowin.net/news/angry-disappointed-users-react-to-blueskys-upcoming-blue-check-mark-verification-system/
[3] https://github.com/bluesky-social/social-app/pull/8226
[4] https://github.com/bluesky-social/social-app/pull/8226#issuecomment-2816090216
[5] https://github.com/bluesky-social/social-app/pull/8226#issuecomment-2815955867
[6] https://github.com/bluesky-social/social-app/pull/8226#issuecomment-2816056692
NEWS AT ELEVEN! (Score:2)
Toxic asshats hate new system!!!!
Shocking really.
if BlueSky wanted to do something useful (Score:4, Insightful)
they would help 4chan get back online :D
Treat check marks like cert authorities. (Score:2)
As the subject says... Let anyone offer check marks based on certificates, and display the certifying entity next to it. "This person verified by Reuters" or whatever. And let users choose which certifying entity to display if there is more than one. The idea being that an endorsement from Reuters would carry more weight than "Billybobs discount blue marks"
What we need is.. (Score:3)
... Arms length verification by a source we all trust... the spirit of openness.
Ha ha.. the dream dies so quickly, doesn't it? But it would be a good idea. Banking is thinking along those lines. That is liability off your shoulders, to outsource the trust anchor. They could form an unholy alliance of ever blaming each other while controlling the agenda for the industry. They want to be able to control the brand, but be open at the same time... you get Ubuntu ... the most popular version has all the worst of Linux.
Autonomy has limits (Score:1)
If you want perfect decentralized autonomy, be prepared to scrutinize every interaction and individual. Like it or hate it, BSky already uses social validation in the form of follower count. Humans are social animals and we take in social cues all the time. Validation by a trusted source is human nature and it is necessary from an efficiency standpoint.
If anything (Score:3)
The last four or so years pretty much proved that nothing much is fact checked any more, but rather checked against narratives.
Bluesky already has verification (Score:3)
Bluesky already has verification - you can change your handle from @whatever.bsky.social to anything you want, as long as you own the domain name for it.
So, cnn.com has the handle @cnn.com – and unless an attacker was able to take over the cnn.com domain name to verify their handle, this is a pretty iron-clad guarantee that the @cnn.com account is run by whoever owns the domain name.
This can be further used to verify individuals - e.g. a company could run @example.com and then their staff could have their own subdomain handle – I could be @PhunkySchtuff.example.com if I worked for them and needed to post under my own name.
deleted comments (Score:2)
They deleted the entire conversation and comments. They dont even have discussions turned on, yet yelled at everyone for even making comments in the only place they could.
Sounds like a really great collaboration with users.
I don't know how much I care either way (Score:2)
However, from the comments, it seems some people don't realize Twitter offered blue checks long before to Musk bought it. All he did was make the blue checks useless.
Re: (Score:2)
Which comments? You're the first one to comment here.
Re: (Score:3)
I didn't read any of it but I think OP meant comments on the PR: [1]https://github.com/bluesky-soc... [github.com]
[1] https://github.com/bluesky-social/social-app/pull/8226
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Either way, the stated reason of getting "away" from that smells of BS, as is the argument that BS is decentralized. From the typical person I've seen on there, it looks far more likely that they came there looking for a like-minded echo chamber.
Re: (Score:1)
And if anybody doesn't believe that, tell me which of these peaks DON'T coincide with something political and then resume a downward trend afterwards?
[1]https://bsky.jazco.dev/stats [jazco.dev]
[1] https://bsky.jazco.dev/stats
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
He says, posting on his MAGA echo chamber Slashdot.
But sure, continue to imagine problems with your "enemies" . That's not deranged at all.