TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Why are blocks on Bluesky public?

90 点作者 carride将近 2 年前

18 条评论

phoe-krk将近 2 年前
So, in other words, the list of people I have blocked on Bluesky, for whatever reason, is readable to everyone on the Internet without the use of any external service.<p>Is this a design I&#x27;d like to use? Or a gaping privacy hole attempted to be explained away through &quot;implementation reasons&quot;?
评论 #36285916 未加载
评论 #36285076 未加载
评论 #36291189 未加载
electroly将近 2 年前
I wonder why they even bothered. Only their client-side &quot;mute&quot; feature actually works in the presence of rogue federated servers, and it only takes one person to set up such an instance. It seems like both the federation design and the decision to be public-only fundamentally can&#x27;t support blocks like this, and they just slammed it in there anyway and hoped for the best. The part that doesn&#x27;t work is like 99% of the effort they expended here; the client-side mute is trivial and the only part that does always work.
评论 #36286010 未加载
tedunangst将近 2 年前
&gt; As we currently understand it, on Mastodon, you only see content when there is an explicit follow relationship between accounts and servers, and follows require mutual consent.<p>You can&#x27;t even create a mastodon test account to test (and disprove) this theory?
评论 #36285446 未加载
evbogue将近 2 年前
On the record blocks is a protocol mistake that has been ported over from Scuttlebot. They&#x27;d be better off with a client side mute button.<p>It&#x27;s an algorithmic choice, but most who&#x27;ve used these platforms for years know public blocking can also be a form of abuse on these kinds of protocols.<p>BS could (and this was done by the people who sunk Scuttlebot&#x2F;Patchwork) for example choose to list all of the people who block you on your profile page as an act of shaming and exclusion.
评论 #36288507 未加载
评论 #36288578 未加载
ChrisMarshallNY将近 2 年前
On the app I&#x27;m writing, blocks are private. Only the blocker knows they have blocked someone. If they block, they disappear from the other member&#x27;s view. It&#x27;s as if they didn&#x27;t exist.<p>As mentioned, someone can figure out that they&#x27;ve been blocked, but they can&#x27;t be certain. There&#x27;s no way to know who another member is connected to. That&#x27;s also private to the member, so the logging in as an anonymous user can see that you are available to unblocked members, but not who you are connected to. You can infer that you are blocked. Also, nothing is truly public. Only members can even see other members, and, currently, every member request is vetted by a human. We&#x27;re not going for scale, which means that getting that sockpuppet account might not be so easy.<p>That&#x27;s mainly because of the demographic we Serve. There are quite a few dangerous people, therein, so we need to be pretty circumspect about privacy and security. We make sure that every member has full control of their privacy and data, and we also default to the most secure. No dark patterns to trick people into divulging information.<p>That said, it&#x27;s a simple community app, so we can&#x27;t throw too much friction into the way members interact with each other. If someone is <i>really</i> worried, they shouldn&#x27;t use our app (or any other social media app, because ours is more anal than most).
评论 #36287806 未加载
miki123211将近 2 年前
One important thing to note here. In decentralized social networks, blocks make very little sense and are nothing more than social convention.<p>There&#x27;s nothing stopping you from writing a Bluesky (or Mastodon) server that doesn&#x27;t respect blocks, shows a list of users that you have been blocked by or gives you block notifications. On centralized networks with closed-off APIs, you can make first-party apps respect block semantics and the point of blocks is accomplished (friction increases.) On decentralized networks, users can just migrate to non-block-respecting instances, and nobody else will ever know whether another instance respects blocks or not.
评论 #36288864 未加载
评论 #36287900 未加载
walkercraig将近 2 年前
Honestly the more I hear about AT&#x2F;Bluesky and some of these other new protocols, the more I keep coming back to thinking of ActivityPub as the one with the most potential for the future.
评论 #36285764 未加载
preseinger将近 2 年前
&gt; One proposed mechanism to make blocks less public on Bluesky is the use of bloom filters. The basic idea is to encode block relationships in a statistical data structure, and to distribute that data structure instead of the set of actual blocks. The data structure would make it easy to check if there was a block relationship between two specific accounts, but not make it easy to list all of the blocks.<p>a bloom filter provides no false negatives, but allows some false positives<p>how do you model an &quot;A-blocks-B&quot; relationship with this data structure?<p>specifically, how do you ensure that &quot;A-blocks-B&quot; blocks only B, and never C D or E?
评论 #36285515 未加载
klabb3将近 2 年前
The obvious alternative is to have blocks be local only, ie a view filter. This would solve the privacy issue. I think I like that model better (but to be fair have not thought it through fully).<p>However, I <i>think</i> I understand why they’re doing it. Bluesky is modeled after Twitter, which has sort of public popularity contest features built in, like retweets and replies, which can let malicious users signal boost using your account. Without a public blocklist, there’s no way to stop that signal boosting, which gives the upper hand to bad actors.
评论 #36285656 未加载
评论 #36285249 未加载
评论 #36287212 未加载
jazzyjackson将近 2 年前
I feel like there&#x27;s a way to put salts and hashes in here so that I can publish a list of conditions, &quot;don&#x27;t send traffic my way if myblocklist.includes(argon2($username + $salt)&quot;<p>instead of publishing the list of people I don&#x27;t want to hear from<p>i also think it&#x27;s fine to let everyone know who i&#x27;ve blocked, but people have different threat models
评论 #36285225 未加载
评论 #36286118 未加载
评论 #36285333 未加载
graypegg将近 2 年前
I’m being naive possibly, but is it really required to have anything more than “mute”? (To use their language “asymmetric block”, you stop seeing their stuff, nothing changes for them in regards to your stuff)<p>It’s really trivial to get to accounts blocking you if all you need to do is open it in your browser’s private&#x2F;incognito&#x2F;guest mode.<p>I think activity pub solves this by just not notifying blocked accounts about new posts anyway. So you can just silently stop appearing in their feed. But maybe that’s not feasible in bluesky.
eviks将近 2 年前
&gt; Like other public social networks, if they log out of their account or use a different account, they will be able to view your content.<p>Why are the blocks so total (or, rather, why is &quot;mute&quot; not the default behavior) given the simplicity of overcoming the read block? Also, isn&#x27;t the main reason to block is to avoid seeing something bad anywhere?
jmyeet将近 2 年前
For some reason this is an unpopular opinion on HN but I&#x27;m going to say it again: federation solves a problem users don&#x27;t care about and creates problems like this (as well as all the other predictable problems we&#x27;ve seen from decades of email such as spam).<p>For context, it seems like Elon Musk is toying with the idea of removing blocking from Twitter [1].<p>As another aside, I&#x27;m personally exhausted with the pet projects of annoying billionaires [2].<p>[1]: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.techdirt.com&#x2F;2023&#x2F;06&#x2F;09&#x2F;elon-musk-says-twitter-is-going-to-get-rid-of-the-block-feature-enabling-greater-harassment&#x2F;" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.techdirt.com&#x2F;2023&#x2F;06&#x2F;09&#x2F;elon-musk-says-twitter-i...</a><p>[2]: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nationalreview.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;twitter-founder-jack-dorsey-backs-rfk-jr-s-2024-presidential-bid&#x2F;" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nationalreview.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;twitter-founder-jack-dor...</a>
评论 #36286189 未加载
jrflowers将近 2 年前
This is a really interesting choice, I look forward to seeing arguments unfold about this once I finally get an account!
michaelmrose将近 2 年前
This seems like a feature. One could imagine profiles that exist solely to categorize say nazis and essentially copying blocked entries or sharing blocklists between groups of accounts.<p>Kind of like filter lists for adblock. I would like to subscribe to naziblock, magablock,botblock, and trollblock please.
XorNot将近 2 年前
What an amazingly naive choice, from people who should know better. The complete lack of comprehension of the nature of spam and abuse on the internet is <i>stunning</i> - as though we haven&#x27;t had decades of trolls, scrapers and bots to learn from.
harlanji将近 2 年前
Public block lists are it. &quot;Social media:&quot; let&#x27;s think about a social party.<p>If someone is upset with another person then everyone can see it, body language alone. Online blocks make pretty much no sense, as the type of person who needs to be blocked will just make more accounts or otherwise persist. The reasonable person who doesn&#x27;t need to be blocked can be reasoned with and will be reasonable.<p>Accounts with unreasonable blocks tell on themselves if the blocks are public.<p>I&#x27;ve been subject to black ball &#x2F; whisper lists so my perspective may be rare. But I picture the people who&#x27;ve come against me being at a party with me and their behavior is very anti-social. People would quickly notice something weird going on, where online I&#x27;m just blocked and muted and nobody else knows.<p>I don&#x27;t block anyone but I am aware there are people who can&#x27;t be reasoned with and they&#x27;ve been the rare exception who&#x27;ve ended up blocked by me in the past. I know they can still access my activity and drop in with anon accounts. &quot;Social media&quot; is more like sociopathic media in its current state. The more like an IRL party things are online the better, so public block lists are an upgrade.<p>Throwback: AOL&#x2F;AIM&#x27;s public warnings. People would start IMing when you got a warning, ask &quot;what happened?&quot; That was pretty social.
social_ism将近 2 年前
Funny how quickly the industry &quot;forgot&quot; self moderation with simple &quot;report abuse&quot; links because they wanted to sell more ads.<p>Moderation was solved in the 90s.
评论 #36285207 未加载
评论 #36285189 未加载
评论 #36286816 未加载