Discord and email worked for a long time with needing something extra after the name. Why would the fediverse be different?
Fediverse
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 !moderators@lemmy.world!
Rules
- Posts must be on topic.
- Be respectful of others.
- Cite the sources used for graphs and other statistics.
- Follow the general Lemmy.world 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
What's stopping that same 7 year old taking TomHanks@Lemmy.World before the real Tom Hanks even knows about Lemmy?
It's not the lack of unique usernames that's a problem. It's the lack of identity verification. Which, I mean, understandably is lacking because it's not like there are high profile people making accounts here. Well, except of course for Margot Robbie.
If "TomHanks" is his username on every other service, like twitter, and youtube, and tiktok, and instagram, then he would want to use it when he comes to the fediverse. Now, if only ONE person can have the username TomHanks (and it just so happens to be @Lemmy.World), then he could send a cease and disist letter, and if that doesn't work, a lawsuit. Madonna did it in the 90s with Madonna.com.
However, if TomHanks@Lemmy.World can exist, and TomHanks@Lemm.ee can exist, and TomHanks@piefed.social can exist and.....and.....and.....then it gets a little impossible for him to really own that username, because it can be duplicated on an infinate amount of instances, some that may not even exist when he shows up to the fediverse.
But if only one instance can have TomHanks, than he could absolutely show courts he's had a vested interest and usership of that identity and thus that's HIS username. Even on services he's never signed up for. Like if he doesn't have an instagram account at all, but someone else starts using TomHanks on instagram, he can take it to the courts that they are not allowed to do that, because that's his username.
But the way the fediverse is currently set up right now, that's not feasible. Because he could enter a court battle with TomHanks@Lemm.ee, and then 5 more instances with his username popup. And eventually it becomes harder and harder to prove that people know his ownership of that username if there's 500 other people also using the same username. It's the reason you can't email celebrities. They can't control their presence in email, so they don't use that as their identity.
Well, what’s stopping someone else from adopting TomHanks@Lemm.ee?
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.
I see this as a benefit. Generally speaking celebrity posts are the most useless threads on most platforms.
Yes, but you see. Lemmy users generally don't give a flat fuck about what celebrities want.
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.
That's a feature, not a bug. Celebrity culture needs to get in the sea.
I presume I'm supposed to care, but I dont, and I don't know why anyone would.
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.
Celebrities are going to be shocked when they hear about email
Never heard of email
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.
Kind of like the BBC has their own Mastodon server instead of being on someone elses.
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.
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 @me@tomhanks.actor
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.
I don't think it's a huge deal, we'll either know they're legit or not. Care to weigh in @MargotRobbie@lemmy.world ?
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.
I'm not here for celebrities and they will always flock to centralized platforms anyways, since they are all about the views.
That's why she hosts her own domain, instead of sending half a million followers to some random fediverse instance.
We had a AMA with Will Ropp, an actor a few months ago: https://lemm.ee/post/31335226
We verified it was him by having him send us a message from his IG.
Those poor celebrities! What will we do without them?
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.
I think it might be kind of nice to be Tom Hanks and have the name WilsonsOnlyFriend@lemmy.world and just chat and chill.
Taylor Swift's Twitter handle is @taylorswift13 and it doesn't seem to be a problem for her.
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.
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.