this post was submitted on 13 Sep 2024
-18 points (40.2% liked)

Fediverse

28283 readers
865 users here now

A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, KBin, etc).

If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to [email protected]!

Rules

Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration), Search Lemmy

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Because let's say you're Tom Hanks. And you get [email protected]

Well, what's stopping someone else from adopting [email protected]?

And some platforms minimize the text size of platform, or hide it entirely. So you just might see TomHanks, and think it's him. But it's actually a 7 year old Chinese boy with a broken leg in Arizona.

Because anyone can grab the same name, on a different platform.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 65 points 1 month ago

Well, what’s stopping someone else from adopting [email protected]?

There's over 1400 people solely in the US named Tom Hanks. Tom Hanks The Celebrity does not get patent rights or trademarks or copyrights on the name.

Wanna know which is the Tom Hanks The Celebrity? Check if their profile is authenticated against their personal website, à-la-Mastodon.

[–] [email protected] 33 points 1 month ago (36 children)

I presume I'm supposed to care, but I dont, and I don't know why anyone would.

load more comments (36 replies)
[–] [email protected] 28 points 1 month ago (4 children)

[email protected]

A celebrity can host their own domain to prove authenticity.

So what. On Xitter I can make an account called Tom.Hanks and get the blue mark by paying Elon. Because Tom Hanks has the username Tom_Hanks.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 month ago (4 children)

The fix for this is for the guilds and unions that represent these celebrities to spin up their own instances. The suffix of the username granting the legitimacy.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 month ago

That's a feature, not a bug. Celebrity culture needs to get in the sea.

[–] AbouBenAdhem 22 points 1 month ago (14 children)

It should work the same as email: you can trust it’s them if the user account is hosted on their own site, or their employer’s, or if they link to it from another confirmed source.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 month ago

Kind of like the BBC has their own Mastodon server instead of being on someone elses.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Yep. Also, aren't there already celebrities on Mastodon? I know George Takei is. Granted, you'd have to know he was @mastodon.social versus mstdn.social so that could complicate things for those unfamiliar with the platform.

OP's definitely got a point, though.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago

One good thing IMO about threads federating, that we get the celebrities, we know they're verified, but I don't have to join corpo social media.

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (7 children)

Who the fuck wants celebrities here?

This is a good thing.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Celebrities are going to be shocked when they hear about email

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 month ago

Yes, but you see. Lemmy users generally don't give a flat fuck about what celebrities want.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I don't think it's a huge deal, we'll either know they're legit or not. Care to weigh in @[email protected] ?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] autonomoususer 15 points 1 month ago

Never heard of email

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 month ago

If you are that famous or worried about trademark, you shouldn't be using someone else's server. Tom Hanks can just buy e.g tomhanks.actor domain and set up the @[email protected] AP actor.

I keep repeating this: the weird part is that we still have all these companies and institutions being okay with depending on someone else's namespace. Having the NYT still announcing their Twitter or Instagram for social media presence is the same as using aol.com for their email.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 month ago (5 children)

You seem to be under the impression that it’s good if this place grows explosively. It’s not. There’s no VC to pay back here (and thank fuckin god for that). There’s no ad revenue here (again, this is good).

Also, not entirely sure what exactly to make of the weirdly targeted quip about a Chinese child, but spidey sense says it’s nothing good.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago (2 children)

That's why she hosts her own domain, instead of sending half a million followers to some random fediverse instance.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago (4 children)

I'm not here for celebrities and they will always flock to centralized platforms anyways, since they are all about the views.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] reddig33 8 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Reminds me of ICANN fucking up all the domain names.

CocaCola.com CocaCola.new CocaCola.drink Cocacola.world CocaCola.bev

Etc.

Shameful. One thing that might work for the fediverse is federal institutions running their own Mastadon instances on .gov to move away from announcements on Twitter. You can’t fake .gov domains.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] NegativeLookBehind 8 points 1 month ago

Those poor celebrities! What will we do without them?

[–] Today 7 points 1 month ago

I think it might be kind of nice to be Tom Hanks and have the name [email protected] and just chat and chill.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago (8 children)

Taylor Swift's Twitter handle is @taylorswift13 and it doesn't seem to be a problem for her.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

We had a AMA with Will Ropp, an actor a few months ago: https://lemm.ee/post/31335226

[email protected]

We verified it was him by having him send us a message from his IG.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Shock: I'm not really Artie Shaw.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago

Account verification is relatively simple, if you have your own website you just add a link back with a special formatting. Problem is, barely anyone applies for self-verification, and several platforms such as Lemmy don't support self-verification whatsoever. I can see why something like a distributed verification agency should be a thing, if we manage to make the implementation less technical for the end users of course.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

We decided to not host any sort of Buy-Sell-Trade community on our hobby instance for this reason. It's a small community so a lot of people know usernames of people they know and can trust. It's very easy for a scammer to use someone's username and say "I'll sell you that thing! Send me $150!".

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I'm on MBin. Your username is displayed as: walden. I can mouse over that to learn that your full username is @[email protected].

This is the same thing as email domain names and display names. Yes, scammers still exploit that, too, but for the most part, people have gotten used to also looking at the actual full email address, and not just the display name or mailbox name. The same can happen here.

Still, I would much prefer if the default view here showed the full username and not just the display name.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] vamp07 6 points 1 month ago

I see this as a benefit. Generally speaking celebrity posts are the most useless threads on most platforms.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago

I have a dream that one day I be part of a platform where one will not be judged by the glamor of their username but by the quality of their discourse.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago

Case in point.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›