iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 06/08/2026

That was it, thanks! IMO the error message should explicitly mention that app passwords are inaccessible if logged in with an app password.

000 0

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 06/08/2026

Ping @mu.social staff: when I go to Settings / Privacy and security / App passwords, I get the error in the screenshot below. Any clue why?

A screen capture of the following error message:

Oops!

There was an issue fetching your app passwords.

Oauth credentials are not supported for this endpoint

100 1

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 03/08/2026

To be more precise my other account is blocked from using the API andpoint to create a session. I can still connect through the application though.

000 0

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 03/08/2026

Hey @eurosky.social staff! My other account, @albert.aribaud.net, is blocked from logging in with a 429 (rate-limit). I stopped login attempts for ~ two hours but still hit 429. Alrerady-logged in sessions work, so it does not look like a ban either. Any idea what is going on?

100 1

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 23/07/2026

If only there was a way to fix a message beyond the first five minutes after it was posted...

000 0

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 27/06/2026

@euroky.bsky.social You probably meant "we can't" etc. If only you could fix your post now that it is more than 5 minutes old... #YesImBeingIronicHere

000 0

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 23/06/2026

If only there was an edit function available more than just 5 minutes after posting. 🫢

130 3

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 21/06/2026

BTW, @mu.social: UX might be improved here. See, "Sign in with password" is the same as "Sign in", because "password", by default, means the *account* password — a lot of people do not know app passwords exist. "Sign in with an app password" would make it clear what that link is about.

000 0

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 17/06/2026

Well, it only covers the very specific use case of fixing a typo noticed right after posting; it does not cover others, such as fixing a typo long after posting, which is a frequent use case with scheduled posts...

010 1

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 14/06/2026

(haha, that should have been "works", and I *really* didn't notice my typo earlier)

110 1

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 14/06/2026

Great! Now, seeing as your wishing wors much more than mine, could you possibly wish for this edit functionality to work more than only five minutes after posting? 😇

120 2

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 12/06/2026

Apologies if I sounded blunt; wasn't my intent. Let me rephrase that: If new users must be 18+, then what was the rationale behind asking for DoB and checking, rather than just asking them if they are over 18?

020 2

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 12/06/2026

OK, so basically you could have gone with a "I am over 18" checkbox?

110 1

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 12/06/2026

Of course they would not decide that, but the point I want to make is: if you don't record the DoB (or today's date and the DoB offset from it), you will necessarily cause false positives and negatives.

000 0

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 12/06/2026

Sorry, I was unclear. If the 16+ flag is "stamped" on the day of joining in, users flagged 16+ would suffer on average about one year of unjust restriction. *If* Eurosky / mu.⁠social managers decided to backdate the stamp one year to mitigate the issue, *that* would let minors access 18+ stuff.

mu.social

100 1

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 12/06/2026

And if the flag creation date is tweaked to avoid that, then you get the inverse problem: people would get "upgraded" to 18+ *before* they are of legal age.

100 1

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 12/06/2026

Assume you're 17 years and 11 months old and register today. You get 16+ on 2026-06-12, and have to wait until 2028-06-12, when you're 19 years and 11 months old to get recognized 18+. You've been denied your rights for nearly two years.

200 2

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 12/06/2026

Then it would generate false negatives or positives.

100 1

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 12/06/2026

Thanks for the clarification however I do have a question: if you do not keep the birth date then how do you know when the user *reaches* 16 or 18 years?

310 3

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 12/06/2026

Hmm… if an Atmosphere user's origin country¹ cannot be ascertained, then no one can tell for sure which laws apply to this user, with a real risk of both failure to apply the law when required *and* wrongful application of law when not required. ¹ Assuming here that origin country ≈ nationality.

200 2

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 11/06/2026

But to be fair, I was more thinking that the DoB feature should have *started* with "we don't have clear specs on age verification, so let's have the field but just hide it / make it optional" at most. Then, wait for legislators to get their act together. And *then* implement said act.

100 1

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 11/06/2026

Well, from my own armchair 🫤 I fail to see how removing a pop-up and adding one check ("age below X *or DoB blank*) would *significantly* increase complexity.

100 1

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 11/06/2026

(assuming, of course, that this limitation and pop-up only appear where DoB knowledge is vital. Adult content comes to mind, but probably a few other things could qualify.)

000 0

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 11/06/2026

Well, the first feature could have been "provide an *optional* DoB field". As for missing (the DoB requirement), I suspect that a pop-up stating "we cannot let you proceed further until you fill in your date of birth in your account" would dispel any mistake.

110 1

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 11/06/2026

Indeed. Note, though, that I would be fine with legitimate interest as a justification *if* some specific law can be pointed to which *requires* social networks to ensure users' age (and, in France, probable some specific "décret" which lays out [some of] the technicalities).

110 1

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 11/06/2026

If these age verification requirements are fast-moving, then maybe you should not try and second-guess them, and certainly you should not try to do governments' work in advance.

040 4

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 11/06/2026

Thanks for your honesty, but just because *you* would not react to this does not mean other people are *over*reacting.

010 1

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 11/06/2026

You could also *not* ask for DoB right away, and just limit access (with relevant notice) if DoB is below limit *or* not filled in.

220 2

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 11/06/2026

Oui enfin là ça devient une discussion "ninja contre pirate" 🙃 la plupart du temps un escrimeur ne se balade pas avec son arme à portée de main, et puis en face la personne peut très bien parer le coup avec le bras, avancer et frapper à la tête l'escrimeur qui pour le coup n'a pas son masque...

120 2

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 11/06/2026

Once you provide that proof, I will dutifully examine it and see if it is valid or not.

000 0

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 11/06/2026

Please don't offload *your* burden of proof onto me. *You* are the one claiming Mastodon fails two of the examples in the thread *you* provided, so *you* get to prove that claim.

100 1

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 11/06/2026

Please elaborate on each, as nowhere in the thread is Mastodon mentioned AFAICT.

100 1

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 11/06/2026

How exactly does it not address them? Mastodon's UI (and behavior) gives users all the needed tools to detect the misuses described.

100 1

Reposted by @aaribaud.eurosky.social

Lia Belle @liabelle.me · 11/06/2026

Would love to get a thread on self-verification as well (link) 🙂 cc: @sebastian.eurosky.social

021 2

Reposted by @aaribaud.eurosky.social

Lia Belle @liabelle.me · 11/06/2026

How about self-verification using your own custom domain handle (hosted on @eurosky.social) and existing website?

2111 11

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 11/06/2026

What makes you think I did not read all the examples? Or, to make things faster, what in my previous answer do you think is wrong and why?

100 1

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 11/06/2026

This is true for absolutely any social network, nothing specific to Bluesky here. In any case, this ad hoc example could just as well work with "just" a doctored screen capture... and will fail just as much if the social network provides public edit history (as, for instance, Mastodon does).

100 1

Reposted by @aaribaud.eurosky.social

PoLiTiPeT @politipet.fr · 11/06/2026

@mu.social (erm @eurosky.social 😁) I would vote for a Mastodon-like approach to edits miss-use mitigation, i.e. notify reposters of edits, offering undo on the repost - and showing edits diffs. Way more cool than a time-window approach. We are not WhatsApp.

0102 10

Reposted by @aaribaud.eurosky.social

Jürgen (the mysztaerrie) @mysztaerrie.eurosky.social · 11/06/2026

That sounds Ok for a start. But why just a five minute window for editing a post? Will this be extended. So, that someone can edit a post whenever he wishes to do so?

132 3

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 11/06/2026

I do understand what I am talking bout. Obviously, you do not. And since there is little point in more effort to pass my point across to you, I'll leave it at that.

100 1

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 11/06/2026

I *do* read all of your replies *entirely*. Again, please do not assume what others do or don't. *Again*, here's why the fact that a false DoB can be entered does not matter: *The DoB should not be asked at all* unless *justified*. Obviously your opinion differs from the GDPR.

110 1

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 11/06/2026

Edited posts should have a visible indication that they were edited, and the edit history should be acessible to anyone who has access to the post itself.

120 2

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 11/06/2026

(make that GDPR, and #EuroskyNeedsAnEditFunction -- one which can be used more than just five minutes after posting)

000 0

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 11/06/2026

It is *not* my first social media experience, and please stop judging others according to your own opinions. DGPR asks that data collection be minimized to the *needed* set, and DoB is not needed here, period. Maybe you don't care about EU citizen rights; I do, especially about mine.

230 3

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 11/06/2026

It is not about asking for proof it is about asking at all.

120 2

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 11/06/2026

With respect, it is a privacy issue as soon as they ask *anything* about it.

120 2

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 11/06/2026

If it is then it is bad UI/UX. If the info mu.⁠social wants is "user is over 18", then it should ask that. And again, asking for a DoB *or* for an "over-18" self-attestation is beyond the needed info and therefore contrary to the GDPR.

100 1

aaribaud.eurosky.social @aaribaud.eurosky.social · 11/06/2026

Didn't 😆 But then, if I want to revoke Oauth access from mu.⁠social to my Bluesky/Eurosky account, how should I proceed?

100 1