Technology

People use usernames like they always have, and rely on reputation to distinguish themselves from the fakes? Senator ted ceuz makes an account called 'senatortedcruz' or if thats taken 'therealsenatortedcruz', and the mechanic makes one called 'tedcruzcars' or whatever. I dont see how your example is even relevant, because under a checkmark verification system both the mechanic ted cruz, and the senator ted cruz would be valid and deserving of a check mark, so there has to be some other way of distinguishing them anyway.

The sake of credibility? What decides that though? Likes? Likes are a big problem imo. It doesn't really do anything except create echo chambers.

It's not.

Not yet 😏

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.

My default is to just assume that they aren't the same person unless corroborated by that person.

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.

Based on how verification was revoked for some users on Twitter based on their content rather than question of their identity, I'm cautious about this system turning into the status symbol it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

This is just a web of trust model, aka a decentralized model of verification. This thread is mostly people that haven't read the details that want to confirm that "Bluesky has been enshittified".

If the same authority is doing verification that is also doing moderation and both ultimately in a for profit setting, that has conflict of interest.

We dont know how reliable bluesky moderation will stay. We dont know how they will respond to political pressure. We dont know how they will monetize past the growth phase and then could also argue a "service fee" for verification.

In a perfect world none of these would happen, but then everybody could still be on twitter and be fine there.