• Umbrias@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    perhaps instead use critical thinking to determine genuinity. the alternative is not xitter’s version, and twitters old version was criticized too.

    • Dem Bosain@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      2 days ago

      Instead of having some form of verifiable indication, people are just supposed to “think hard”? Have you looked around lately?

      The problem only gets worse with AI creeping closer.

      • P03 Locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        Why think hard when you can have somebody think for you?

        “Every facet, every department of your mind, is to be programmed by you. And unless you assume your rightful responsibility, and begin to program your own mind, the world will program it for you.” — Jack Kornfield

        • pohart@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 days ago

          I don’t have the ability to easily verify users. A user verification service would be great. I think it could work decentralized, but maybe have a separate service for it. Servers independently authenticate, and federate with each other. If one starts authenticating poorly, defederate.

          I don’t think it’s a good fit within Lemmy or Mastodon, or … Because I don’t think someone who runs a server wants to bother with it. It needs to be it’s own service that integrates with other services.

      • Umbrias@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        critical thinking does not simply mean “think hard”, it means research this person and account for maybe two, even three, seconds, before assuming everything they say is truth.