The fuck did anyone expect?
Angry, disappointed users react to Bluesky's upcoming blue check mark verification system
Submitted 1 year ago by cyrano@lemmy.dbzer0.com to technology@lemmy.world
Comments
southsamurai@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
aeronmelon@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Anyone who is surprised that BlueSky is going down the same path as Twitter (X, not withstanding) belongs on BlueSky.
moakley@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Would it be so bad if it follows the same path as Twitter? If it connects people and organizations in an honest and helpful way for fifteen years?
Or we could all just keep shitting on it while it facilitates social and political movements and enables rapid communication across the planet. Then more than a decade from now when some Ultra-Nazi trillionaire buys it, we can all say “I told you so,” and be real smug about it.
primemagnus@lemmy.ca 1 year ago
If it ends Elon, I’m gonna allow it. If Twitter fails, his stock in Tesla will have to back it. If that tanks… he’ll have to work his way out of bankruptcy. Just squeeze….
stardust@lemmy.ca 1 year ago
Yeah for the masses they will likely always flock to commercialized easy to use social media that reaches critical mass the fastest, so them being willing to move and keep moving is best we can hope for. For rest of us stuff like fediverse will be there to use.
thatKamGuy@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
He’s already sold Twitter/X to xAI; he’s got his arse covered when the bottom eventually falls out.
njordomir@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I think a few more people “get it” every time the cycle repeats, but also, a sucker is born every minute.
einkorn@feddit.org 1 year ago
Bluesky, the decentralized social network […]
Were only one instance exist or did I miss something?
fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 1 year ago
I dont see this in the article.
massi1008@lemmy.world 1 year ago
You can easily host your own instance with a simple docker stack.
I dont know of any public instances except the main but I also havent searched.
BackwardsUntoDawn@lemm.ee 1 year ago
you can host your own PDS, but everyone is still using the same appview
Pirata@lemm.ee 1 year ago
I think their initial selling point was that Eventually©®™ Bluesky would federate with the rest of the Fediverse.
Is anybody really surprised that a social media corporation didn’t make it their utmost priority to allow their userbase to connect out of their proprietary platform?
Natanael@infosec.pub 1 year ago
They never said they’d do so natively with other protocols - but they support Bridgy, so you already can do that.
InfiniteHench@lemmy.world 1 year ago
As I understand it, the protocol has the ability to decentralize built in. But the technical requirements are prohibitively high to the point only large businesses or corps could afford to do it, and I believe (someone correct me) the company hasn’t switched on the functionality yet.
Natanael@infosec.pub 1 year ago
Maybe you remember PDS federation not being open for a while, but it’s open now.
Running a public appview can be very expensive, but they’re working on making it cheaper to run one with a limited scope.
unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de 1 year ago
The biggest thing is that you need to be manually authorized by them for federation. They will only ever federate with servers that arent serious enough competition to lead to democratization of the overall network.
noodlejetski@lemm.ee 1 year ago
my mom has always told me that I had the potential to work at NASA. but the requirements are prohibitively high
Drunemeton@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Last heard (a few months ago) the cost is in storage. The protocol isn’t too complicated now, but it generates a shit ton of data, and IIRC you need a minimum of 3 copies.
MangoPenguin@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 year ago
Nope, it’s 100% centralized.
lone_faerie@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 year ago
It’s 100% centralized, but with the ability to be decentralized. Sorta like Threads before they started federating
victorz@lemmy.world 1 year ago
This is a little bit more black and white compared with the other responses. 🙈
reddig33@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I don’t see anything controversial in the article. Did I miss something? Just looks like a way to make sure the public figures and companies you are communicating with are who they say they are.
MangoPenguin@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 year ago
It already has domain verification which is better IMO.
Zak@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I think the existing domain-based verification system is a better way of doing that. Something like Mastodon’s verified links might be a nice addition. This more centralized system is… not what I hoped for.
merdaverse@lemmy.world 1 year ago
What are you talking about? This is a web of trust model, literally a decentralized model. Not everyone on social media needs to have technical skills to verify via DNS records, verified links etc. If you want a community that gatekeeps for for computer engineers only, you already have Mastodon.
reddig33@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I didn’t sound like a centralized system from the article. More like they want a third party like Verisign or something.
Something will have to be done as these platforms become more popular to cut down on fraud and disinformation. You don’t want people impersonating other people or organizations, or companies. Even if Bluesky starts federating to other platforms, just knowing that they have a blue sky blue check would be an improvement if you could display that check on other clients like mastodon posts.
ICANN has already made a mess of domain names so I don’t know if relying on the domain is enough. People are using non-Roman characters to trick people into thinking a website domain is the real thing. Others are buying up all these random domains so you get things like medicare.net and medicare.org and medicare.com etc etc.
I dunno what the answer is. Just rambling out loud in frustration.
cyrano@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 year ago
Verification wise there is already domain. But ultimately, it is too soon for the twitter exodus to get the blue check. All in all, this type of outrage is doomed to repeat with that type of central entity.
cyrano@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 year ago
Embrace the fediverse
TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 1 year ago
☑️
ComradeRachel@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 year ago
Tbh I’ve seen more people asking for this than the people complaining.
MangoPenguin@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 year ago
How come they don’t use the already built in domain verification? It’s basically fool proof to certify that an account is owned by a specific entity.
RagingRobot@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I think having both is nice
ComradeRachel@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 year ago
It’s what Twitter had and most people on blueksy just want Twitter before Elon. It sucks but that is really what the majority of people even want. They don’t care about the decentralized stuff.
Rocketpoweredgorilla@lemmy.ca 1 year ago
There’s been a lot of impersonated accounts popping up lately, so it doesn’t surprise me they’ve opted to do something like this.
MangoPenguin@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 year ago
Bluesky already has domain based verification which solves that perfectly, I guess people just don’t want to use it.
TommySoda@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Oh yeah, they are literally everywhere. And a lot of them are impersonating people that haven’t switched from Twitter yet to take advantage of it specifically.