6 ms·

Twitter/X is not an authoritative source of news, regardless of whether it is an "official" account doing the Tweeting or not. Anyone can get a blue check by pa

by paxys 3y ago

Twitter/X is not an authoritative source of news, regardless of whether it is an "official" account doing the Tweeting or not. Anyone can get a blue check by paying $8/mo.

TaylorAlexander 3y ago
The SEC twitter account has a grey check, which you cannot get by paying $8. https://twitter.com/SECGov https://twitter.com/SECGov
- paxys 3y ago
  And how does the average user know this?
  - unleaded 3y ago
    By clicking on it
    - paxys 3y ago
      Clicking on any blue check mark shows "this account is verified". But that isn't supposed to mean verified?
      - SparkyMcUnicorn 3y ago
        This is what it says when I click on it. > This account is verified because it is a government or multilateral organization account. Along with a link to "Learn More"[0] [0] https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/profile-labels https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/profile-label...
        paulgb 3y ago
        Right, but I think paxys’ point is that the message you get when you click a blue check also implies the account is verified (which is not true in any rigorous sense of the word “verified”). The average user can’t be expected to know that the white one is “more verified” when they both say “verified”.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- solardev 3y ago
  What does the grey check mean?
  - toomuchtodo 3y ago
    https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/profile-labels https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/profile-label... "The grey checkmark indicates that an account represents a government/multilateral organization or a government/multilateral official. Eligibility criteria to receive a complimentary grey checkmark are listed below. Additional government and multilateral accounts can receive grey checkmarks through Verified Organizations. Eligible government organizations at the national level may include: Main executive office accounts, agency accounts overseeing specific areas of policy, main embassy and consulate accounts, and parliamentary or equivalent institutional and committee accounts. Eligible government organizations at the state and local level include: Main executive office accounts and main agency accounts overseeing crisis response, public safety, law enforcement, and regulatory issues. Eligible government individuals may include: Heads of state (presidents, monarchs and prime ministers), deputy heads of state (vice presidents, deputy prime ministers), national-level cabinet members or equivalent, the main official spokesperson for the executive branch or equivalent, and individual members of all chambers of the supranational or national congress, parliament, or equivalent. Eligible multilateral organizations may include: the main headquarters-level, regional-level, and country-level institutional accounts. Eligible multilateral individuals include: The head and deputy-head or equivalent of the multilateral organization. US only: Accounts of current US state governors and senior military leaders are also eligible. Eligible accounts may apply here. (link) Any government or multilateral accounts that do not qualify under our current grey checkmark criteria can see if they’re eligible under our Verified Organizations feature."
    - solardev 3y ago
      Thanks for the quote! Lol, I can't believe this is really what they ended up with: multicolored stars to indicate different things? I thought it was a joke at first, but no, that's really how it works now. What a strange world...
- nullc 3y ago
  What makes you think crypto grifters can't get a grey check? https://files.catbox.moe/ruag6b.png https://files.catbox.moe/ruag6b.png
psychlops 3y ago
And getting 500 thousand followers. Easy peasy.
- quickthrower2 3y ago
  When the payout is say $100M from trading on the fake news, yes it is.
supermatt 3y ago
Theres a few different colours now: https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/profile-labels https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/profile-label...
- data_monkey 3y ago
  Blue checkmarks still got hacked when all it meant was the person was "popular".
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
seydor 3y ago
what is an authoritative source? does it come with a certificate?
- solardev 3y ago
  How about a .gov domain name?
- JLCarveth 3y ago
  The SECs website?
  - seydor 3y ago
    for news in general? cool
    - ziddoap 3y ago
      Or, ya know, for news from the SEC?
Eji1700 3y ago
We really really really need some legislation about governmental agencies using privately owned companies to announce things. There was already some for radio/early news, but the landscape has changed so much, and it bothers me a ton that these platforms are being used.
- dragonwriter 3y ago
  > We really really really need some legislation about governmental agencies using privately owned companies to announce things. What kind of legislation? There's a whole lot of existing law that applies in that domain (both statute and Constitutional case law), but if you think we need different laws, it probably helps to at least present the general shape of the law you want rather than just that it should in some way touch impact government using private platforms for announcements.
  - ChainOfFools 3y ago
    An example might be that the government sets up its own very basic one-way tweet-like notification service, something as simple as or simpler than an RSS feed, with the official content accessible directly via a .gov hosted web page. Whatever X is or becomes, as owned by private interests, is trusted with nothing more than scraping and rebroadcasting the original and authentic source. A solution with less developer and user overhead ma ybe that government webs host a list of public keys by which any "gray or blue check mark" type of authenticatuon signal capability on any private service can be validated against, and the government can revoke keys at any time if for some reason there's a suspicion that a counterfeit message is being distributed via these private services. Maybe repurpose the creaky old atomic clock time sync radio signal that is deployed almost everywhere as a means to distribute a rotating secondary factor. just old PKI tactics proven to work for two plus decades. But this approach is still open to exploiting human tendency to trust things that have been trustworthy for a long time, until they aren't. So I still think hosting official messaging feeds directly from a government run server, accessible by any barebones http client capable of displaying plain text with basic paragraph/item formatting at most, is the gold standard. The current situation, where X or meta or google or even a mastodon instance is entrusted with the entire conduit from human input to broadcast output, is a terrible precedent to normalize.

by paxys 3y ago

Twitter/X is not an authoritative source of news, regardless of whether it is an "official" account doing the Tweeting or not. Anyone can get a blue check by paying $8/mo.

TaylorAlexander 3y ago

The SEC twitter account has a grey check, which you cannot get by paying $8. https://twitter.com/SECGov https://twitter.com/SECGov

paxys 3y ago
And how does the average user know this?
- unleaded 3y ago
  By clicking on it
  - paxys 3y ago
    Clicking on any blue check mark shows "this account is verified". But that isn't supposed to mean verified?
    - SparkyMcUnicorn 3y ago
      This is what it says when I click on it. > This account is verified because it is a government or multilateral organization account. Along with a link to "Learn More"[0] [0] https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/profile-labels https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/profile-label...
      - paulgb 3y ago
        Right, but I think paxys’ point is that the message you get when you click a blue check also implies the account is verified (which is not true in any rigorous sense of the word “verified”). The average user can’t be expected to know that the white one is “more verified” when they both say “verified”.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
solardev 3y ago
What does the grey check mean?
- toomuchtodo 3y ago
  https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/profile-labels https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/profile-label... "The grey checkmark indicates that an account represents a government/multilateral organization or a government/multilateral official. Eligibility criteria to receive a complimentary grey checkmark are listed below. Additional government and multilateral accounts can receive grey checkmarks through Verified Organizations. Eligible government organizations at the national level may include: Main executive office accounts, agency accounts overseeing specific areas of policy, main embassy and consulate accounts, and parliamentary or equivalent institutional and committee accounts. Eligible government organizations at the state and local level include: Main executive office accounts and main agency accounts overseeing crisis response, public safety, law enforcement, and regulatory issues. Eligible government individuals may include: Heads of state (presidents, monarchs and prime ministers), deputy heads of state (vice presidents, deputy prime ministers), national-level cabinet members or equivalent, the main official spokesperson for the executive branch or equivalent, and individual members of all chambers of the supranational or national congress, parliament, or equivalent. Eligible multilateral organizations may include: the main headquarters-level, regional-level, and country-level institutional accounts. Eligible multilateral individuals include: The head and deputy-head or equivalent of the multilateral organization. US only: Accounts of current US state governors and senior military leaders are also eligible. Eligible accounts may apply here. (link) Any government or multilateral accounts that do not qualify under our current grey checkmark criteria can see if they’re eligible under our Verified Organizations feature."
  - solardev 3y ago
    Thanks for the quote! Lol, I can't believe this is really what they ended up with: multicolored stars to indicate different things? I thought it was a joke at first, but no, that's really how it works now. What a strange world...
nullc 3y ago
What makes you think crypto grifters can't get a grey check? https://files.catbox.moe/ruag6b.png https://files.catbox.moe/ruag6b.png

psychlops 3y ago

And getting 500 thousand followers. Easy peasy.

quickthrower2 3y ago
When the payout is say $100M from trading on the fake news, yes it is.

supermatt 3y ago

Theres a few different colours now: https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/profile-labels https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/profile-label...

data_monkey 3y ago
Blue checkmarks still got hacked when all it meant was the person was "popular".
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

seydor 3y ago

what is an authoritative source? does it come with a certificate?

solardev 3y ago
How about a .gov domain name?
JLCarveth 3y ago
The SECs website?
- seydor 3y ago
  for news in general? cool
  - ziddoap 3y ago
    Or, ya know, for news from the SEC?

Eji1700 3y ago

We really really really need some legislation about governmental agencies using privately owned companies to announce things. There was already some for radio/early news, but the landscape has changed so much, and it bothers me a ton that these platforms are being used.

dragonwriter 3y ago
> We really really really need some legislation about governmental agencies using privately owned companies to announce things. What kind of legislation? There's a whole lot of existing law that applies in that domain (both statute and Constitutional case law), but if you think we need different laws, it probably helps to at least present the general shape of the law you want rather than just that it should in some way touch impact government using private platforms for announcements.
- ChainOfFools 3y ago
  An example might be that the government sets up its own very basic one-way tweet-like notification service, something as simple as or simpler than an RSS feed, with the official content accessible directly via a .gov hosted web page. Whatever X is or becomes, as owned by private interests, is trusted with nothing more than scraping and rebroadcasting the original and authentic source. A solution with less developer and user overhead ma ybe that government webs host a list of public keys by which any "gray or blue check mark" type of authenticatuon signal capability on any private service can be validated against, and the government can revoke keys at any time if for some reason there's a suspicion that a counterfeit message is being distributed via these private services. Maybe repurpose the creaky old atomic clock time sync radio signal that is deployed almost everywhere as a means to distribute a rotating secondary factor. just old PKI tactics proven to work for two plus decades. But this approach is still open to exploiting human tendency to trust things that have been trustworthy for a long time, until they aren't. So I still think hosting official messaging feeds directly from a government run server, accessible by any barebones http client capable of displaying plain text with basic paragraph/item formatting at most, is the gold standard. The current situation, where X or meta or google or even a mastodon instance is entrusted with the entire conduit from human input to broadcast output, is a terrible precedent to normalize.