Celebrities will never adopt the Fediverse until usernames are centralized. (lemmy.world)

submitted 4 months ago by Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world to c/fediverse@lemmy.world

100 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Because let's say you're Tom Hanks. And you get TomHanks@Lemmy.World

Well, what's stopping someone else from adopting TomHanks@Lemm.ee?

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.

(page 2) 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] greenshirtdenimjeans@sh.itjust.works 4 points 4 months ago

Give em a blue checkmark

[-] nokturne213@sopuli.xyz 2 points 4 months ago

$50 bucks little man, put that shit in my hand.

[-] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 3 points 4 months ago

Good

[-] meldrik@lemmy.wtf 3 points 4 months ago

Take picture of proof you are Tom Hanks
post picture on Lemmy
Pin it to the top on your profile (once that feature exist)
???
profit!

Either way, celebrities will probably never use Lemmy or other social media unless it goes mainstream.

[-] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

Yeah, thats the goal. To make the fediverse (and Lemmy by assosiation) mainstream.

[-] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

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.

[-] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

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.

[-] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 1 points 4 months ago

The account with her pic floating around here is real?

Respect

[-] queermunist@lemmy.ml 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

This would require some kind of federation alliance of instances that check each other's usernames to ensure no duplicates over the whole network. Sure, maybe lemmy.shit doesn't recognize the network, but then they don't get federated with.

This is definitely possible, but it doesn't seem to be happening.

[-] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

Oh I've been thinking it needs an official alliance now for some time. Where a preagreed set of protocols are all adheard to. Just so all the services can play nicely with each other. Still decentralized in operation, but unified in experience.

And if some rouge instance wants to stay seperate, well, good luck growing hexbear.

load more comments