What we’ve launched today is the first step for how we’re going to evolve verification.
The initial set of trusted verifiers includes news orgs who’ve agreed to take on the task of verification for their journalists. In the future, this set will expand, as well as how apps can choose to use them.
The initial set of trusted verifiers includes news orgs who’ve agreed to take on the task of verification for their journalists. In the future, this set will expand, as well as how apps can choose to use them.
Comments
This means that other apps could choose a different set of trusted verifiers, or use a different model entirely.
• Domain names
• Verification by one of the trusted verifiers
Both techniques give a different kind of signal, with their own benefits, and I believe we can do more.
• One will be functionally deprecated by Bluesky in about nine months
• It ain't gonna be the checkmark
Do "we" submit our domain names to Bluesky?
This is all stuff my publishers used to do, like print books and artwork with covers and paper. 🙃
👇🏻
We’re still testing ideas in this area. Trust doesn’t just come from one signal — it’s built up from many overlapping ones.
Probably not the signal you lot were going for. But, yes, certainly a signal.
Why not use SSL certificate standards that already exist instead of redefining something unique for AT Proto?
It essentially is a death sentence by sealing it off.
#NoBlueChecks #NoCaesars
@pfrazee.com @jay.bsky.team
It's such an important step to making Bluesky competitive with Twitter.
There is also a web version.
https://www.reddit.com/r/BlueskySocial/comments/1hezu6b/i_made_a_free_app_that_gives_you_notifications/
It´s what i miss most from the sad app.
WOT pronounced as WHAT could, potentially, generate too Abbott and Costello scenarios.
No one needs a replica of twitter's process. They messed up by treating verification as about notability or access. That's the bad way.
Lots of people you've never heard of can get impersonated, putting children, businesses, gov'ts at risk.
The show had ended. He was only famous among a small group of 9-16 year olds. You'd never verify him under this process.
#Action2025 #Democracy
🎯 https://antimagaclub.com
📢 @antimagaclub.bsky.social
PGP encryption tool in the early 90s. And Phil had a lot of caveats in his initial presentation of it (like "Alice knows Bob is not a cop, and would sign his key, but she also knows Bob is an idiot who'd sign Charlie the Cop's key.")
Oh wait I dont have a blue checkmark... Maybe you should ignore this
*denies all™*
hide the verification badges that's a great thing. You can find it here - Settings - Moderation - Verification settings.
Why do I need to know that you're you?
I need to know that Stephen King is Stephen King. Why do I need to know that some random person actually is some random person?
Basically let's others know they are the real one.
Colors/shapes for different types of trust.
If I 'trust' an account, it gets a perfect circle. Those my circles mark get octagons. Octagon-marked get heptagons, etc to triangles.
Then orange or red, and shaped like a poop emoji.
https://www.vox.com/2015/2/18/8055691/transgender-transgendered-tnr
It's a bit of a strange move to take when media has been heavily corrupted and defanged by capital, newsrooms are leaving in droves, the Observer just unhappened last night, and the talent is all going freelance because the bullshit peddling causes too much mental damage.
Curious.
nor can i
with youtube chan where my 650ish subs i helped 550 get monetized with avg of 4Kish ( reach of 2.2 mill )
beginning to just think of packing it all in and saying good luck to everyone
And, you don’t need their verification. Those 30 million should be enough, right?
You would not say someone is "blacked". You would say they are black.
You would not say someone is "talled". They are tall.
You would not say someone is "transgendered", you would say they are transgender.
Adjectives. Black person. Tall person. Transgender person.
It's a party, Keith, and we're not invited.
https://bsky.social/about/blog/7-05-2023-namecheap
Bluesky learned the wrong lessons, are making the same mistakes twitter made that led to verification being about prestige not actual proof identity.
Lots of those who need it aren't famous
It may be it's just too early and my brain's sluggish.🤣
@jay.bsky.team
But also, why don’t you maintain a simple domain/website? In the internet, it’s the only thing you can actually own.
Just pay someone like 50 dollars one time and you'll get it.
Where capitalist orgs are empowered not individuals
https://bsky.social/about/blog/7-05-2023-namecheap
love what you're doing but still think Bluesky should have a robust internal team obv doing merit-based verifications too (not paid!) for edge cases -- solo folks, people who leave the orgs who verified them, et al...
Showing the trusted verifier when the user mouses over the check-mark would be very helpful.
Because if they all have the same credibility as @nytimes.com then you've wasted a lot of time and money.
Yeah, they'll "verify" journalists of color, and women journalists -- but only the ones whose ideas and opinions are acceptable to these rich white males.
(and don't tell me about the "domain name" stuff. I checked it out, and
by mod list creator targeted harassment. What's worse u block and they add to multiple libelious list. Emailing trust doesn't work.
The handle being a domain is one thing, the blue checkmark solution is different.
ie I can make a verification system right now but it won’t show up in your feed as verified because the BlueSky app (rightly) doesn’t recognize mine
Maybe you have a niche community that runs its own BlueSky clone and wants internal verification
Can I help build an experimental version? Have a few ideas.
We may not see ramifications of this for a while, but this approach is dangerous.
what about regular end users?
do you honestly expect my auntie to set up her own domain to verify her bluesky account?
you DO know how sill that is right?
when will bluesky finally acknowledge this and roll out an alternative?
now make it easy for universities and government agencies and large corporations and their pr agencies!
I came for the good intentions and the kindness. I came to stay informed and meet people of different interests/thoughts. To laugh and share…
If this site feels we users are incapable of critical thinking, then so be it.
Not even actual public institutions. New York Times gets it, but not NASA.
Jesus Christ this is pathetic.
To the extent that it amplified resentment of the media, it very literally made the world worse.
And you're copying them.
I'd think that more trust on internet would be a good thing..
Prominent accounts with tens of thousands of followers were rebuffed when trying to get a checks, while someone with fifty followers could if they'd freelanced for Buzzfeed.
Everybody deserves identity protection. Not just NYT writers.
havan't seen one of these verifications yet myself, but would be nice to quickly tell who the verifier is
Managers and editors at favored press outlets could (apparently) just send stacks of names/accounts to Twitter, where staff would reach out and set up the checkmarks.
Bluesky is just formalizing the thing that Twitter quietly did under the table.
But if you can point me to the policies on selection of Trusted Verifiers, beyond "a press outlet that has checks on Old Twitter", feel free.
This is the soul of the internet I want to live in. 👍
Thanks for doing this Bluesky 💙 We Love You
I want to see the posts of regular people, not regular people who believe their own hype. 🫣
Muppets are cool, wanted and loved! Like cats! ❤️
Me me mee mee me mee meeee
All people want to be seen, want to be heard, want to feel.
We are all exactly the same at the base level. We want to be happy and avoid pain. (some want pain to be happy) Either way, we love you, yes, you, we see you ❤️
I get the need for verified news. That's all we need. And again, imo.
We have domain verification that should be enough.
This instead is classist, elitist vibes.
1) verifying outside their scope of knowledge
2) verifying inside, but in a biased way. For example - if the NYT verifies a bunch of their TERF opinion writers, but refuses to verify their LGBT columnists. Can other news outlets verify them?
https://substack.com/@ogredragon?utm_source=user-menu
You can pin this, and you will see all your saved bookmarks at the top of your feed as long as you use the pin icon. 📌
Bookmark junkie here 🦋
I personally don’t mind if verification is restricted to so called well known people, companies as that can help with mitigation of disinformation, e.g having confidence that the person or organisation reporting the information is a legitimate source. Just don’t inflate their reach.
There should be no favouritism to verify accounts, people cam look for them, they post we find, stop.
Melonhead Musk might try to sue for usage of their blue check..
BlueSky submission portal inside account area? Please 🙏 thank you.
That accounts are not bots?
The "problem" is that's effectively open to everyone, so doesn't allow Bluesky's management to create an arbitrary class of privileged people and organisations.
The problem that Twitter/X has is boosting verified accounts at the expense of everyone else, not merely charging money for something.
Especially considering I nuked my Meta accounts (FB, Threads, and Insta are all Meta) due to the anti-trans policy changes they made.
Some symbols are tainted forever – nobody in their right mind thinks that we should bring back the swastika as a good luck charm for aviators – but in this case, I feel that “PTSD” is a bit too strong…
It may be just a matter of time to educate people
Verification worked well on Twitter before Elon mucked it all up. It'd be better to use a different symbol that hasn't been tainted
What else could be used? Maybe just a circle with checkmark?
I'll never get verified but that doesn't mean I'm not real!
Being boring, tame and non-confrontational doesn't get me followers and it definitely won't get me verified!
But I'm okay with that!
please publicly address the censorship in Turkiye.
https://youtu.be/PdLPe7XjdKc?si=dBWViXC8nr7B06EM
https://fontawesome.com
Hopefully it get mine!
And yet we still have no edit feature. Thanks for listening to us. 👏🙄
Welcome to Twitter 2.0 and the start of the race for an elitist blue tick.
This will go exactly as it did on Twitter. Badly.
But I don't know if it will work, and in any event, capital and power influence on the news will make them comply and be toxic same as ever.
People need to separate for themselves truth from the lies with the copious amounts of spin and disinformation. Wealth has an angle but it’s the poor who are often the real truth tellers
Good lord, people! 😅
Verification is good when you can't buy it. The end.
For instance, my Prime Minister 🇨🇦and England
Also, most European presidents are here too
Why not improve on the DNS-based verification? (which is decentralized and transparent)
Sounds like a cheap marketing move :/.
🌈🦋🌤️
https://en.meteorologiaenred.com/The-amazing-phenomenon-of-iridescent-clouds-explained.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_iridescence
The Other Place is Black & White.
No room for gray areas there...
Nuance.
Got it.
Glance X.
Glance Bluesky.
Glance X.
Glance Bluesky.
Wonders if history always repeats itself. Hopefully everyone remembers the first thing Elmo screwed up after buying Twitter.
"Show us your papers, please."
It makes it easier to categorize if it's self-categorization. Each is then identified and targeted with psyops appropriate to them.
Blue checks where always awful
And there was no reason why verification wasn’t extended to everyone
It’s why journalists loved being there because they got checkmarks most couldn’t get
They always begin with "don't be evil" and then it's "papers, please!"
I wouldn't be surprised if they've agreed this with Peter Thiel and Palantir.
This is mass surveillance by the technocrats. It's totalitarianism in a new suit.
In other words, it's nice that we have this place, and I hope twitter burns into ashes.
Does that help.
Tell HR
pls follow this