• joel_feila@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Something like this unavoidable.

    Example, ted cruz the car mechanic in marfa Texas has just has much right to use blusky as professional shit bag senator ted cruz. But hiw do tell the real one from the racid sack of weasels.

    • FriendBesto@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 hours ago

      You can not make any commentary on Communism here. You will get down voted even if your criticism was correct. Probably even more so and the reason why this is likely to get downvoted out of hand, as well.

      • ImmersiveMatthew@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        25 minutes ago

        That is ok. I have never had an issue sharing facts that may trigger some. In fact the only reason it triggers some is it hits somewhere deep.

    • moth@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 hours ago

      Bluesky is literally an example of enshittification under capitalism. Go away

    • Marte@lemmy.eco.br
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 hours ago

      What exactly a website related to Jack Dorsey has anything to do with Communism lol

  • blazeknave@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 hours ago

    To quote my well known journalist friend after switching from twitter “what’s that? Oh, that open source stuff? Hahaha nah bruh, mastodon is silly”

    • SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      40 minutes ago

      Reminds me of a meeting my co-worker and I had with the IT staff of a company that is a customer using research instruments in our facility. The meeting was to ask us to enable data synchronization through SharePoint. (We’re a Linux shop.) We asked what the issue was with getting their data files with SFTP. They said, “It’s open source.”

      Then, a few beats of silence as it sinks in for us that there is no next step in the chain of logic. That is the totality of their objection.

  • Tattorack@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    12 hours ago

    So long as the checkmark isn’t bought through some subscription service, I’m fine with this.

    The whole reason why verification exists is because other will steal the name of someone famous and masquerade as them, with real world consequences. A verification system now means that certain platforms and people will get more attracted to be there, and thus Bluesky will grow.

    • SSTF@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Unfortunately, the forecast isn’t good for the integrity of what should be a simple system. Under Dorsey, the Twitter blue checkmark had already become a tool for showing content approval by Twitter. In various instances users had their status removed based on their content and not on a question of if they were who they claimed to be.

  • Mike@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    16 hours ago

    This was always bait to keep people using corporate social media instead of decentralizing. I am not sorry for the users one bit.

  • Opinionhaver@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    19 hours ago

    I don’t see how even the way Twitter does it is any worse than not having such system at all.

  • Mars2k21@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    23 hours ago

    idk man I haven’t seen anyone complaining about it on Bluesky

    This is a net positive, nice to have a social media where verification checks are…actually used for verifying the person behind an account

    • SSTF@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Based on how verification was revoked for some users on Twitter based on their content rather than question of their identity, I’m cautious about this system turning into the status symbol it became on Twitter rather than the verification it claimed to be.

    • Airportline@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      15 hours ago

      Most of the complaints I’ve seen were about Bluesky’s lack of a formal verification system.

      They could never figure out how the current system of checking the username.

      • Natanael@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Domains only help you verify organizations and individuals you recognize directly.

        This verification system also allows 3rd parties (it’s NOT just bluesky themselves!) to issue attestations that s given account belongs to who they say they are, which would help people like independent journalists, etc.

      • BackwardsUntoDawn@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 hours ago

        I feel like domain usernames are still inherently susceptible to phishing, you can get a typo or similar character to try and trick someone that your username is an official one

      • Nick@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        15 hours ago

        I saw some small talk about it, and it really just boiled down to domain verification is great for more tech savvy folks, but trying to get larger accounts (think politicians, celebrities, etc) is a lot harder. Having a visual check, using tools within the app or site, is a lot easier.

        And personally I like the idea of verification checks as long as it remains a simple means to do just that: verify the owner of the account. Morons like Musk and his ilk always thought it was a clout thing, and for a small minority that was probably the case, but by and large before he ruined it, it was great.

      • spongebue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        23 hours ago

        If they are, and there isn’t anything to display it, how are were to know what’s been vetted and what’s slipped through the cracks? Especially on a new account?

        • MangoPenguin@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          15 hours ago

          It’s the username so already quite visible.

          For example someone at say, NPR, could use a name like @bob.npr.org which is only possible by verifying ownership of the npr.org domain name, so there is no need to vet anything.

          • spongebue@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            15 hours ago

            That’s great for an organization like NPR which may have the resources to tie its own domain name into Bluesky. For some freelance reporter or otherwise verifiable person, I’m not sure it’s quite so practical.

  • emb@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 day ago

    I do not see anything to be angry or disappointed about?

    Verification badge was good, the dumb thing Twitter did was throw it away by letting anyone pay for it.

    • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      15 hours ago

      Nah it was not good. Domain names already do that and are accessible to all at all times with full transparency and decentralization. Bluesky is literally regressing.

      Even mastodon’s verification system is better than checkmarks.

      • emb@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        14 hours ago

        Far from perfect, but I think it’s good to have a layer that very visibly shows ‘yes, this is the account you want’.

        Domains are a worthwhile addition, but they run into almost the same problem as usernames and handles. Can be made misleading easily - sure, I could often go to the web address and verify it (if they don’t put up a convincing fake site), but that’s much lower visibilty.

        Eg, you can probably register nintendo@nintendoamerico and get it by some folks just as easily as registering the Twitter handle. There’s a payment step to get the domain, but that’s about it.

        The centralization problem you mention is a good point though. It was a fine system, if you felt like you could trust Twitter as a verifier. Today obviously, one could not. But Bsky seems to at least theoretically have a ‘choose your verification provider’ idea in mind, which would (again theoretically) resolve a lot of that issue.

      • Pup Biru@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        15 hours ago

        domain names do that for people with well known domain names, and verification processes do that for people without

    • Billiam@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 day ago

      Right now, venture capital investments - same as all tech starts out.

      How it’ll monetize to become self-sufficient remains to be seen.

      • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        15 hours ago

        Not same as “all tech starts out”. You’re literally typing on tech stack that didn’t start out like that. Then there’s Masotodon, fediverse, gnome, kde, linux etc. Etc. - literally almost no good software comes out of VC world statically speaking.