Software Engineer @Google. Previously @IBM. I like board sports and probably want to be somewhere warmer than wherever I currently am. Tweets are my own.
@kelseyhightower@Cam11us@shadowbq But if the (private) keys and the signatures are all stored in the same place (Twitter) and never really leave the trust boundary like email does, what's the point in signing them? Or, what's the point in doing that _publicly_?
Previously, we issued a warning before suspension, but now that we are rolling out widespread verification, there will be no warning.
This will be clearly identified as a condition for signing up to Twitter Blue.
@MonkeyConnolly@IAPonomarenko@elonmusk So that others can distinguish the real you apart from other accounts claiming to be you. It's a stamp of authenticity.
Getting ready for the onslaught of lookalike/homograph Twitter handle phishing campaigns, as verified users decide not to pay to keep the verification and become indistinguishable
@jschauma@RachelTobac Well yeah, because it's the first data point that allows you to assign a concrete dollar value to a breach, which will decide the budget for security π
@devongovett I think it depends on the custodian's philosophy. There's also a big difference between frameworks that are essentially the product and frameworks that are byproducts (but still primarily owned & maintained by a single company).
@kelseyhightower For privacy and ownership ideals, these solutions seem great but they always beg the question of whether self-hosting content is worthwhile for content creators, considering both usability & cost. I'm genuinely curious where public opinion falls on that particular scale