Automation can verify that realdomain.com has much higher traffic/status/web-presence/google-ranking than raeldomain.com
Comment on Bluesky may soon add blue check verification | TechCrunch
hamsterkill@lemmy.sdf.org 3 weeks agoIsn’t owning the domain proof enough already?
It’s open to abuse and exploitation the same way domains are in general. An enterprising faker could register a domain that looks legit, but isn’t.
sqgl@beehaw.org 3 weeks ago
Max_P@lemmy.max-p.me 3 weeks ago
Yeah that’s a pretty good point. As a technical user that seems solid but for the average user that makes sense.
jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de 3 weeks ago
And centralization solves this how? The other social networks are giving more checkmarks to grifters and scammers than they are giving them to honest people because, spoiler alert, con artists are very good at both building a following and paying bribes.
hamsterkill@lemmy.sdf.org 3 weeks ago
I think their plan is for it to be like how website cert verification works. You have a set of trusted authorities that issue certs (or in this case verifications) and that can revoke them if needed.
t3rmit3@beehaw.org 3 weeks ago
Sounds like centralization to me. Who decides to vest authority in this group? Who selected the members of this group?
Unless there is some method for each host to nominate members and it changes dynamically based on total votes at any given time, you’ve just entrenched centralized authority in your ‘decentralized’ app.
hamsterkill@lemmy.sdf.org 3 weeks ago
I expect the trusted authorities would be selected by the server where the user account resides. I.e. if a server’s admin does not recognize a certain authority, it would not show their verifications to users logged in to their server.
It’s possible that it could extend to user selections of trusted verifiers as well, but I think implementing that level of granularity would be more of pain than it’s worth to Bluesky. Still, I could be surprised.