@ Shawn ⚡️
2025-05-04 23:42:31
The reboot of digg is going about as one might expect, with a small minority speaking out for privacy. I'd hoped for better.
Below is the latest update from the digg team summarizing the debate about "safety", moderation, KYC, and the like. It's a post viewable only when signed in, so here's the raw text.
It's a worthwhile read for us on nostr. What we have is rare and precious. It's nostr or dystopian KYC in service of "safety".
___
Update on "Humans Under Attack" post
A huge thank you to everyone that submitted comments. We're taking a good hard look here and want to implement gradients of trust (not binary trust or untrusted) over time. Definitely not in our spec for v1.
A lot more conversation to have around this, but we certainly want a place where people can feel both safe from bots and also preserve privacy/not storing sensitive personal information.
Here is the AI summary—
The discussion revolves around the tension between preventing AI/bot abuse and preserving user anonymity/privacy. There's a strong consensus within this group that the AI/bot problem is real and needs addressing, but significant disagreement on the acceptable methods.
Theme 1: Strong Desire for Verification & Quality (Anti-Bot/Slop)
Insight: A very large portion of the comments (often highly liked) expresses a strong desire for some form of verification to ensure human interaction, maintain quality, and prevent the "AI slop" seen on other platforms (Reddit, X are frequently mentioned). Quality over quantity is a recurring sentiment.
Evidence (Quotes):
juujian (71 Likes): "Yes, quality over quantity!"
Christopher (74 Likes): "All users need to be ID Verified and those that aren’t verified then their reach is less impactful. if I want bot slop I’ll go to Reddit. lol"
EdwardC4 (21 Likes): Expresses frustration with spam/hate on other platforms and supports accountability. "...as long as we keep hate and that stuff off Digg i’ll be super happy..."
Bing-Bong (5 Likes): "The number 1 reason I signed up for this new iteration of digg is to escape the bots and the dead Internet. I'm willing to pay a premium for this."
Theme 2: Fierce Defense of Anonymity & Privacy Concerns
Insight: This is the most significant point of disagreement. A vocal group, also receiving substantial support (likes), strongly opposes methods perceived as invasive, particularly ID verification (KYC). Concerns cited include privacy breaches, potential government misuse, data security risks, and the fundamental importance of anonymous speech online.
Evidence (Quotes):
hybridhavoc (85 Likes): "hard disagree. We still need to protect anonymous and pseudonymous speech, and identity verification systems inevitably become privacy nightmares or targets."
Teire (33 Likes): "@hybridhavoc agreed. Not a chance am I giving my personal info to anyone"
0xTJ (5 Likes, edited): "@Christopher Absolutely not, requiring ID (EDIT: as in shared with some arbitrary third-party...) is not an acceptable requirement, I will not be sharing."
Austen Draper (6 Likes): "There are serious privacy concerns with verification... A trusted (by both parties) third party system is the sensible way to go. One that only gives Digg a simple yes or a no... Without passing anything further would be my hope."
Theme 3: Tiered Access/Verification as a Popular Compromise
Insight: Many users propose or support a tiered system where the level of verification dictates user capabilities (e.g., basic email for voting, higher verification for posting/commenting). This is seen as a potential way to balance access, anonymity, and spam prevention. Allowing communities to set their own required tier is also a popular related idea.
Evidence (Quotes):
mo (14 Likes): "I think the approach of allowing sub committees to decide which verification-tier level users they want is VERY smart!"
Kaleb (17 Likes): "Love the idea of staggered levels of access, were the initial entry can just be an email address"
js (21 Likes): Discusses Bluesky's approach and tiered ideas, highlighting the complexity.
Justin Jackson (17 Likes): Describes Metafilter's model combining a small fee with waiting periods as an effective combination of approaches.
Gib (0 Likes but illustrative): "I like the tiered system. Email/phone for being able to use (Digg/Bury), but deeper vetting (no knowledge proofs) for full participation (posting/commenting)."
Theme 4: Skepticism about Effectiveness & Gaming the System
Insight: Some commenters express doubt that any system, including paid ones or KYC, can truly stop dedicated bad actors or sophisticated bots. Concerns about account selling, AI bypassing checks, and the limited impact of small fees are raised.
Evidence (Quotes):
js (21 Likes): "Even paying money isn’t a good signal for humans vs bots - look at X for an example of a place that is filled with blue checkmarked AI."
Belthasar (0 Likes): "KYC doesn’t prove there’s a human behind the comments an account is making. All it proves is that account was tied to a human being at one point in history... bot takeover of human Digg accounts may not be worthwhile except for the most motivated of entities..."
wavyknife (1 Like): "You’re over-thinking it. Use behavior-based heuristics, you’ll restrict growth by putting it on the user to verify." (Suggests focusing on behavior over upfront verification).
Theme 5: Accessibility and Inclusivity Concerns
Insight: Users raise valid points about ensuring verification methods don't unfairly exclude people due to cost (especially in different countries), disability (e.g., facial recognition issues), or lack of required documents (like passports).
Evidence (Quotes):
the_3 (1 Like): "PLEASE don't wind up in a place where facial ID is the only option. As a person with a profound physical disability... I have a 0% success rate verifying myself on platforms that require this..."
ManPanda (5 Likes): "...Using passports for zero-knowledge proofs might be limiting if the potential user doesn’t have a passport. Same problem with credit cards - some younger users may not have one..."
Kaleb (17 Likes): "Biggest worry would be equitable access to whatever that second layer of verification could be..."
Theme 6: Exploration of Specific Technologies & Alternatives
Insight: The discussion includes suggestions for various specific technologies like Zero-Knowledge Proofs (zkTLS, zkPassport), Stripe Radar, Worldcoin, Plaid integration, behavioral analysis, invite systems, web of trust models, and enhanced moderation tools.
Evidence (Quotes):
coreyo (1 Like): Lists numerous potential tech solutions across different categories (tiered access, selective disclosure, trust badges, mod dashboards, public audits).
EulerLagrange (7 Likes): Mentions zkTLS/zkPassport as open-source options.
amanda (8 Likes): Suggests social reputation/connections/vouching.
Powertrip (8 Likes): Mentions Google's postcard verification method as an example of a 'difficult' but effective solution.
Summary:
The core challenge highlighted by this discussion is finding the right balance. There is overwhelming support in this group for creating a high-quality platform resistant to bots and spam. However, there is a strong, equally supported counter-argument defending user anonymity and privacy, primarily resisting invasive methods like ID verification. Tiered access systems, allowing different levels of participation based on verification, emerge as the most frequently proposed and generally accepted compromise, often coupled with the idea of community-level controls and user filtering options. Accessibility and the inherent limitations/gameability of any verification system are also key considerations.