top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 171 points 6 months ago (3 children)

will require identification and photo validation

With all the privacy issues in the past few years, it's "dead on arrival" as they say.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 114 points 6 months ago (10 children)
    load more comments (10 replies)
    [–] 54 points 6 months ago (5 children)

    will require identification and photo validation

    Straight from the book "How to kill your app before launch", page 1.

    data privacy at its core

    Looks like they haven't seen the obvious conflict with requiring id + photo, unless they plan on manually review every application.

    After reading the article, it sounds like they're just making yet another xitter clone with the hopes that govt figures will use it. Govts could just spin their own mastodon or similars for a similar effect.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] [S] 10 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    Considering the amount of bots and trolls everywhere I can see a certain appeal on an app that requires an id verification to be honest.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 6 months ago* (1 child)

    But if they're doing it half-assed as most services (send photo of passport, take a selfie), it won't be a challenge for AI to generate random IDs and a matching avatar for photo/video verification. The only way this could work is if they'd verify your ID by reading the NFC chip inside the passport or ID card.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 5 points 6 months ago

    True. I'd be up for that, but honestly more for a real social network for friends and family, like Facebook once was, than for a debate forum like Twitter. That demand could maybe endure that it would remain a friends only network..

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 39 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    I hate X, but good luck with this:

    The new platform, W, will require identification and photo validation to ensure that its users are both humans and who they claim to be,

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 35 points 6 months ago

    Spyware disguised as a "social media platform", hard pass.

  • source
  • [–] 32 points 6 months ago (5 children)

    cough cough Mastodon.

    @EUCommission@ec.social-network.europa.eu

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (5 replies)
    [–] 27 points 6 months ago

    The shit some people will go to to avoid an open platform.

  • source
  • [–] 24 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    Isn't this just some random company trying to cash in a little from controversy surrounding Xitter?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 20 points 6 months ago

    They named themselves W but those draconian ID requirements are an L

  • source
  • [–] 19 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    There is no future in social media unless it's decentralized. Gonna assume this is dead on arrival.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 16 points 6 months ago
    [–] 12 points 6 months ago

    I am staying on mastodon for the micro blogging, not interested in centralized shit. Also, recommander systems are a plague.

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    I know Europe might seem like a country of you’re illiterate, but um it isn’t. W is a Swedish company with a dumb idea at the core of its app

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 9 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    Governments making this stuff instead of the people? Really bad idea.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 6 months ago* (5 children)

    Oh because people did such a good job the first time?

    Anything people make, no mater how good, can and has been purchased to be turned to shit and controlled by those that purchase it. In that world, which is the one we live in now, a government made and publicly used social media service is just about the only way to create a resilient and uncorruptable form of social media. Especially compared to current alternatives that are already getting corrupted.

    I'm not saying what they'll make is perfect. But it's far better than any other option we currently have. Knee jerk reacting to assuming it's bad is very much the same crux billionaires used in the US to weaken the government that would otherwise regulate them.

    A government is literally the best suited to creating this tech due to its public utility. Same with electricity, water, Emergency services, roads and more. Everyone uses them, so our taxes should go to making those things better.

    This is a step in the right direction.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • load more comments (4 replies)
  • [–] 9 points 6 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 6 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    For non-believers in that format of social media, is ATProto good or bad?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 6 months ago* (13 children)

    The basic building block of the Fediverse is the instance, right? Every instance is its own self-contained, centralized social media service that optionally interacts with other instances. EG Trump's Truth Social is a Mastodon instance that does not federate.

    ATProto takes a more radical approach. Everything is modular. There is no instance or anything that is complete in itself. It's more like the WWW. You can make websites in different ways. These are made findable through search engines like Google or Bing, which are not affiliated with companies offering web hosting.

    ATProto takes everything apart. It tries to avoid choke points or lock-in as far as possible to thwart monopolies. You have a server that stores your data (posts, etc ...), called a PDS. You can move your data to a different server. An identity provider tells others where your account is at any moment. A relay collects all the posts that people make and makes them available for further processing. This can be used to create algorithmic feeds, or moderation (aka labelling). These things are independent of each other and can be independently offered by different parties. You can pick and chose which to use, though there isn't a whole lot of choice yet.

    ETA: No idea what W wants to offer in that regard.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • load more comments (13 replies)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 8 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    Anna Zeiter, CEO of W, has told Bilanz.ch that W stands for “We.” Meanwhile, the first of the Vs that make up W stands for “Values,” and the second for “Verified.”

    “The fact that W comes before X in the alphabet is certainly also a welcome coincidence,” Zeiter said.

    Was curious if the”W” had a deeper meaning to it. Turns out it’s actually two V’s that form a “W”

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 6 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 child)

    So a Mastodon ripoff, but its instances hosted by a single entity (effectively centralized): ensuring all instances residing within the European jurisdiction (allowing for full control over it). I don't see how they genuinely believe, to have humans do the photo validation, when competing at the scale of X; especially when you run all the instances. Perhaps they could recruit volunteers to socialize the losses, as the platform privatizes the profits. Nothing but a privacy-centric approach however: said the privacy expert...

    Zeiter emphasized that systemic disinformation is eroding public trust and weakening democratic decision-making ... W will be legally the subsidiary of “We Don’t Have Time,” a media platform for climate action ... A group of 54 members of the European Parliament [primarily Greens/EFA, Renew, The Left] called for European alternatives

    If that doesn't sound like a recipe, for swinging the pendulum to the other extreme (once more), I don't know what does... Because can you imagine, a modern social media platform, not being a political echo chamber: not promoting extremism by use of filter bubbles, and instead allowing for deescalation through counter argumentation. One would almost start to think, for it all to be intentional: as a deeply divided population will never stand united, against their common oppressor.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 5 points 6 months ago

    I genuinely thought this was an Onion post.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 6 months ago
    load more comments
    view more: next ›