• Dr. Moose
    link
    fedilink
    English
    14
    edit-2
    10 days 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.

    • Pup Biru
      link
      fedilink
      English
      4610 days ago

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

      • nickwitha_k (he/him)
        link
        fedilink
        English
        2
        edit-2
        9 days ago

        Yup. Need something like EV certs to really verify… And that would only make sense if it’s a “no (non-real) screennames” kind of thing.

        • Pup Biru
          link
          fedilink
          English
          19 days ago

          i think the .id.au domain licensing rules are a pretty reasonable middle-ground:

          https://www.auda.org.au/au-domain-names/the-different-au-domain-names/id-au-domain-names/

          The id.au domain name you choose must match or be an acronym or abbreviation of your first name or family name, or your nickname

          you have to provide ID to register any .au, so you’re verified as a person, and though they don’t pre-check your nickname, AFAIK if there’s a complaint you do have to prove that you’re “known by” that name

    • @emb@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      11
      edit-2
      9 days 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.com or similar 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.

    • @merdaverse@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      49 days ago

      “Everyone should be able to setup their own domain and mess with DNS records to get a verified account”

      Do you realize how utterly disconnected from reality this sounds?? Technical people that have absolutely not clue on how make good UX for end users is how we got Mastodon in the first place, and why its adoption is abysmal.

      • Dr. Moose
        link
        fedilink
        English
        2
        edit-2
        9 days ago

        You can pay someone to do that for you tho it’s not any different form paying someone to verify you ina centralized way. Its really not that hard.

        Even with more complex setups like mastodon servers you already see markets for this. You can get a basic managed instance for yourself for like 15$/mo - that’s basically nothing for anyone who needs to verify themselves as a brand.

        • @merdaverse@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          29 days ago

          This is not a “pay for verification” model. Have you even read the article or anything related to it? It is literally not centralized, it’s web of trust.