| ▲ | giancarlostoro 6 hours ago |
| If your website will block me out because I used a privacy friendly email, I want nothing to do with your website. |
|
| ▲ | muse900 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Yes but not always applicable unfortunately… e.g. the other day I was in Italy, I needed to park on the publicly available parking which was paid to the municipality. No other parking available anywhere near in 30 mins walking distance. (paid or free) I had to download a 3rd party app that asked me to register. This app isn’t by the Italian government, it’s affiliated though. So in that situation, I want nothing to do with your website or app, because I wouldn’t able to park. |
| |
| ▲ | ivanjermakov 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Have exactly the same situation with parking in Italy. Having a private company operating all paid parking on an island is not very healthy. | | |
| ▲ | echelon 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Having a handful of companies that can contact you has created a land of monopoly hyperscalers. It's so hard to build anything big and durable because they've created these steep gradients. | |
| ▲ | gedy 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | It's too bad there's no one willing to be a parking lot attendant on an Italian island. |
| |
| ▲ | drnick1 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Can you not pay with cash or card anywhere? What if you don't have a "smart" phone? I would categorically refuse to park anywhere that requires running a proprietary app on my device. Fortunately, in the States at least, I have not encountered such a place yet. | | |
| ▲ | cassianoleal 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | In the UK, I believe parking companies need to have a way to pay without the app but it's usually so bloody inconvenient that it's about the same as requiring it. | |
| ▲ | qalmakka 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | You need to find a working parking metre which may or may not work, accept cards or give back change. Also most if not all of parking apps allow you to pay by the exact minute and extended your stay dynamically from the go, while with a paper ticket you need to go back to the car and get another one before it expires | |
| ▲ | Slash65 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | In my city in Northern California our downtown uses an app for parking now. I don’t use it so it’s still an option, but you have to goto a kiosk, enter your license plate number, and pay with card. It’s made the downtown more of a ghost town (admittedly it was already dying) and the boomers with cash just don’t go. The younger 20somethings all complain “boomers are too stupid to use an app” and have no concern for privacy apparently. Welcome to the future I guess. | | |
| ▲ | autoexec 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | > The younger 20somethings all complain “boomers are too stupid to use an app” and have no concern for privacy apparently. They were literally trained not to value their privacy. The first generation of ipad kids now have driver's licenses. | | |
| ▲ | mingus88 an hour ago | parent [-] | | I hear some take pride in being “digital native” and only knowing a world where smartphones are a ubiquitous part of your life. I’m quite content having grown up without being always online. The childhood I had where what I did between school time and when my parents expected me home for dinner were mine alone. Every event was not recorded by 50+ cameras with bad seats and posted online for nobody to watch. A truly excellent time to be alive that I doubt we will see again |
|
| |
| ▲ | calvinmorrison 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Essentially too bad. Look at the parkmobile disaster. | | |
| ▲ | HeatrayEnjoyer an hour ago | parent [-] | | The what? | | |
| ▲ | calvinmorrison 3 minutes ago | parent [-] | | basically you have to use parkmobile in many places unless you carry literally rolls full of quarters due to the depreciation of the USD, some places dont even have machines anymore. ParkMobile is a moneygrabbing operation that municipalities use to run their parking stuff - yay saas. They got hacked and leaked everyones phone numbers, license plates, history, and more. The settlement in court was - you got I believe a $1.00 coupon to use parkmobile again - but you could only use .50 towards each transaction |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | ABS 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | you can pay at the parking meters directly, no need for a 3rd party app | | |
| ▲ | qalmakka 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | Yes, but - the apps almost always allow you to remotely increase your stay
- the apps almost always allow you to pay by the exact minute instead of by the quarter/half an hour |
|
|
|
| ▲ | vinni2 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Unfortunately sometimes we are at some specific provider’s mercy for whatever reason like lack of appropriate alternatives. |
| |
| ▲ | MoonWalk 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | COUGHredditCOUGH | | |
| ▲ | al_borland 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I think Reddit falls under this category. > If your website will block me out because I used a privacy friendly email, I want nothing to do with your website. | | |
| ▲ | kodt 12 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | I know I have created accounts on Reddit with disposable email services before. | |
| ▲ | HeatrayEnjoyer an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Reddit doesn't even require an email address to make an account. You can just leave the email field blank. | | |
| ▲ | Ferret7446 6 minutes ago | parent [-] | | But it does require a valid phone number which is worse. (I might be misremembering but they definitely require a valid something now, as I found out a while back creating a new batch of accounts to rotate) |
| |
| ▲ | MoonWalk 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Yep, toxic garbage staffed largely by same. Unfortunately, it has amassed quite a bit of potentially useful information. | | |
| ▲ | al_borland 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | You don’t need an account to access the information. It’s also all been sucked up my the LLMs, for better or worse. | | |
| ▲ | roboror 32 minutes ago | parent [-] | | It's full circle now and a large portion of posts and comments are now LLM generated responses, whether by a bot or copy/pasted by a human. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | SV_BubbleTime 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | IDK I’ve appreciated Reddit killing off good features like old version, putting a time-lock banner on mobile while logged out, trying to block VPNs when logged out, etc. I want that company devalued and bought by Verizon or AOL to die a Yahoo death. What is insane to me is how few people realize their stock has a higher P/E than nVidia… and it isn’t because of some bullshit minor AI data deals. It’s a youth-forward narrative machine, and everyone knows it. | | |
| ▲ | pjerem 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | FWIW, old.reddit.com is still there and working | | | |
| ▲ | lenerdenator 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > I want that company devalued and bought by Verizon or AOL to die a Yahoo death. If the future's your oyster for what happens to Reddit, why stop there? If it's bought by somebody, that implies that Spez gets an amount of money that is greater than $0.00. Ideally, we avoid such a grim and unjust outcome. We want it to be made effectively worthless so he goes broke. | |
| ▲ | SXX 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | RedReader still works. For now. | |
| ▲ | 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [deleted] |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | coldtea 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| It's precisely when I want "nothing to do with your website" that I want to use a private friendly email if I'm nonetheless forced to interact with it... |
|
| ▲ | Bender 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I ran into this with an NVMO mobile provider. They did not like my personal email domains (assorted .net and .org) so I nagged their customer support until they manually added it. Their marketing team happily emails my personal domains once added. Some day this will probably cause a problem but my goal is to eventually get rid of my cell phone either way. |
| |
| ▲ | reaperducer 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | I ran into this with an NVMO mobile provider. As of about six months ago, AT&T's web site would not accept email addresses without a three-character TLD. I had to get a customer service person on the phone to manually change my address. | | |
| ▲ | toast0 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Even .us ??? Pretty sure I used my usual domain (enslaves.us) with them for wireless and california landline and u-verse. | | |
| ▲ | Bender 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | Just a guess but .us does not permit whois privacy and perhaps that may be a factor but I am entirely guessing as all my domains have whois privacy enabled and they would not say why their system rejected my domains. |
| |
| ▲ | badc0ffee 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Do you mean it was failing with a >3 character TLD? | | |
|
|
|
| ▲ | abirch 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I frequently buy a domain that I think is funny and use that to forward all my emails to my main email account. It's trivial to do from Cloudflare. Then after that 1 year is up, my domain goes away and so does all of the spam. |
| |
|
| ▲ | joeyhage 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Completely agree - have you encountered this before? The Gmail plus sign alias trick has been widely known for a long time and, to my knowledge, still works well today. It would be easy enough for websites to either block + in gmail addresses or instead grab the true email. |
| |
| ▲ | cloudfudge 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Some sites that block "+" in email addresses are actually just doing it out of incompetence. My credit union, for example, will actually accept an address with a "+" in it, but nothing will work because some broken bit of web 1.0 plumbing along the way converted it to a space (it shows up that way on my profile page). I wouldn't be surprised to see " " on my printed bank statements. | | |
| ▲ | janc_ an hour ago | parent [-] | | Oh yes, so many websites are incompetent like that. And of course after registering with foo+bar@example.com they will happily send invoices to bar@example.com |
| |
| ▲ | autoexec 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Spammers know to just cut out the +whatever. It's a simple regex to keep those from even getting into a database. | | |
| ▲ | janc_ an hour ago | parent [-] | | The + has no special meaning in the standards, and thus removing it will just result in invalid addresses in many cases… | | |
| ▲ | AlexandrB 19 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Doesn't matter. Most email services[1] use it the way Gmail does and spam is a numbers game. Losing a few valid addresses is worth correlating all those other addresses for most spammers. Standards only matter to nerds like us. [1] https://proton.me/blog/what-is-email-alias#5 | | |
| ▲ | Ferret7446 a minute ago | parent [-] | | Except plus address users are also less likely to be receptive to spam, so it's probably better to just not bother |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | SXX 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Gmail also have "googlemail.com" alias and you can split your username with dots since they dont count like "user@gmail.com" and "u.s.e.r@gmail.com" are the same thing, Nothing of it solves privacy though. | |
| ▲ | ciupicri 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Guess what? There are some dumb website or applications complaining that the email address is invalid. |
|
|
| ▲ | hamdingers 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Great. If you insist on giving me a fake email, your business is probably a liability I don't want anyway. Of course this is industry-dependent (I'm in payments processing) and not every business should have this posture, but being able to distinguish between users who are going out of their way to be anonymous and users who aren't is a useful signal. |
| |
| ▲ | danudey 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > If you insist on giving me a fake email, your business is probably a liability I don't want anyway It's not a fake e-mail, it's a legitimate e-mail that you can send e-mail to and the user will receive, which has to be created by a paying iCloud user and not an anonymous rando off the internet. I'd be interested to know what downsides, if any, you see for a website to accept a private e-mail address like this. Do you have a legitimate complaint about these sorts of e-mails? Again, given that private relay isn't an 'anonymous e-mail service' (it's still tied to your iCloud account so spam, etc. shouldn't be any more of an issue) but merely an 'anonymous to the person you're giving the e-mail to' service. If your actual complaint is 'if you insist on giving me an e-mail that you can revoke unilaterally making me unable to contact you against your wishes, and which cannot be associated with other user data from other sources to build a profile of you, then you're not worth having as a customer' then that's a separate complaint - and one that means I want nothing to do with your website. | | |
| ▲ | hamdingers 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | I'm curious what you think the difference is between "a paying iCloud user" and "an anonymous rando off the internet." How many Apple gift cards do you reckon get sent to fraudsters every day? Decades worth of iCloud+ surely. I'm running a business where I need to know who you are, because my platform can be used defraud other people. If you're trying to hide who you are from our very first interaction, that's a massive red flag. If you can trivially create hundreds of these emails, and fill in the rest of the required info with bought/stolen/generated PII, now I have a vector for mass fraud. Requiring you to use a recognized non-anonymized provider doesn't stop you, but it sure does slow you down. (It's not this simple of course, but all security works in layers) If these terms are not acceptable to you, then great! Don't use the website, there's no need to be salty because that's what you said you wanted. Isn't it? I don't mind either, because the number of legitimate users who are bothered by this restriction is infinitesimal compared to the number of fraudsters who would take advantage if it wasn't in place. It can be difficult to comprehend the scale of platform fraud unless you've worked in this area, many days fraudulent signups outnumber legitimate ones. | | |
| ▲ | FireBeyond 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > If you're trying to hide who you are from our very first interaction, that's a massive red flag. You conflate email with identity, just like the media companies conflated IP addresses. It's not hiding who you are, it's hiding my real email address behind a mask that you can't choose to sell off to marketers, or spam yourself, or otherwise profit off, regardless of the nature of our relationship - I've got plenty of spam emails from companies that I closed accounts with, thus severing our relationship. > If you can trivially create hundreds of these emails, and fill in the rest of the required info with bought/stolen/generated PII, now I have a vector for mass fraud. Requiring you to use a recognized non-anonymized provider doesn't stop you, but it sure does slow you down. (It's not this simple of course, but all security works in layers) It's not that simple, but I guarantee it doesn't remotely slow anyone down, not at the scales we're talking. Maybe if you're talking one entity and tens or hundreds of thousands of accounts, but it's laughably naive to believe that such a person who is set up to conduct "mass fraud" can't create 100 Gmail/Outlook/iCloud email addresses a day, if not an hour, with near zero effort (it's not like they're committing "mass fraud" by hand, after all). | | |
| ▲ | hamdingers 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | > I guarantee it doesn't remotely slow anyone down I have watched the rate go down and stay down on real live dashboards. > Maybe if you're talking one entity and tens or hundreds of thousands of accounts We are. I'm not so rude as to call you "laughably naive" but I am speaking from experience and you appear to be considering a hypothetical. |
| |
| ▲ | AlexandrB 9 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > If you're trying to hide who you are from our very first interaction, that's a massive red flag. If you're trying to collect personal information that's none of your business from the very first interaction, that's a massive red flag. Like how many data leaks and customer data exposures is it going to take to understand that the data I'm giving you is a liability for me? How much spam am I expected to put up with because you give my data to a "data broker" for one reason or another? Why should I trust anything you say regarding how you will handle my data after all the embarrassing fuck-ups over the years? What is your liability if you mishandle my data, is it approximately $0? Do you have an arbitration clause in your TOS so I can't even sue you when you screw up? There's zero responsibility from the tech industry for their continued failures in this regard and then you have the temerity to lecture me about my "red flag"? Seriously? | |
| ▲ | iamnothere 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | It sounds like you are trying to shoehorn email into some kind of “real person verification” role, when you ought to be doing actual KYC through some provider like ID.me. (If honest to god no-shit fraud is on the table.) | | |
| ▲ | hamdingers 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | If I can filter/throttle fraudsters at the create account step for free, I save on the fees my KYC/IDV providers charge each time they attempt to defeat it. | | |
| ▲ | iamnothere 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | At the cost of blocking legitimate users who don’t want to be spammed, don’t want to be correlated after a data breach, etc. I have been willing to do KYC for services (usually financial) without giving out my main email. Services that put up too many barriers to this don’t get my business. I concede that there aren’t that many users like me, compared to the general public, but I’m a legitimate user. | | |
| ▲ | tom_ 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | There must be at least two of us! | |
| ▲ | hamdingers 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Luckily I'm not obligated to serve legitimate users who's behavior is similar to that of fraudsters. That would make my job very difficult! As I said above, and you concede, users like this are too small a minority to be worth worrying about. | | |
| ▲ | anonymous908213 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Nowhere other than on HN have I seen so many people who are actively proud of their anti-consumer (and frankly anti-human) behaviour. It's a rather revealing look into the veil behind big tech. A lot of people have this misconception that it's evil $bigcorp forcing employees to do what earns a paycheck, but no, there's no shortage of normal people like yourself bragging about anything they can do to identify and track consumers more easily while comparing them to fraudsters for not wanting to be tracked. I suppose that's the narrative you have to concoct to help yourself sleep at night. I'm curious, though: > choosing to participate anonymously Why are your name, e-mail address, and phone number not on your profile? Are you using HN with the intent to commit fraud? | | |
| ▲ | hollerith 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | anonymous908213 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | They aren't giving useful information, they are posting an opinion insinuating that people who use """""fake""""" (ie. non-personally-identifying) e-mail addresses are fraudsters. > If you insist on giving me a fake email, your business is probably a liability I don't want anyway. They did not provide any meaningful insight into the field, they are simply insisting that e-mail addresses should be a tool for personal identification because it saves them money over doing real KYC. In other words, they believe KYC should be slanted further in favor of corporations and against customers, such that KYC is publicly available for free, because they value not doing the work of verification over humans having any privacy whatsoever. As they are entitled to post their opinion on humans having no privacy rights, I am entitled to post mine and point out the hypocrisy of them choosing to participate in this forum privately while advocating for and boasting about denying service to other people who attempt to protect their privacy. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | Marsymars 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | As others have alluded to, I'm not doing this to be anonymous, I'm doing this because companies can't be trusted not to leak my email address. Every real business that knows my real identity (banks, payroll, government, retailers, etc.) gets its own alias. When an organization invariably leaks my email and I start receiving spam to it, I generate a new one, update my email on record, deactivate the old one, and the spam stops. | |
| ▲ | rpdillon an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > fake email Its a real address that I can use to monitor your behavior, since businesses send so much damn spam. Been using them for 25 years, not gonna stop any time soon. | |
| ▲ | AlexandrB 16 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Seems like we have a meeting of the minds here. You don't want me as a customer and I don't want you as a vendor (or payment processor). Enjoy your spamming :) | |
| ▲ | cloudfudge 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | There's nothing "fake" about the email. It's just an alias made specifically for each recipient. |
|
|
| ▲ | yalogin 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| ChatGPT doesn’t allow private relay and hasn’t allowed it since launch may be. So it’s not always possible to not use them, of course now there is no need to use ChatGPT and I have just stopped and moved on from it |
|
| ▲ | fg137 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Didn't really have a choice with openrouter. I ended up using "Hide My Email" which gave me an icloud.com, which will likely no longer work according to this article. |
|
| ▲ | Rebelgecko 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| It's pretty common. Shopify blocks my email aliases. So does ikea |
|
| ▲ | x0x0 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I used to run a hybrid mobile app + webapp company. Private emails regularly lead to awful customer service interactions because people cannot tell us the email they used to register. Fastmail at least is off the beaten path enough that people probably can understand. Apple, especially using sign in with Apple, is horrid. And not just people unable to tell us the email; they then create multiple accounts; try to sign in on web and use their actual email and then have 2 accounts and flip shit that their stuff is gone; etc. Oh, and regularly blame us for their confusion. |
| |
| ▲ | trollbridge 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | It’s up to the app architect to make a way to make this work, and to stop using emails as anything other than a UUID type of token | | |
| ▲ | JoblessWonder 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | So I guess the solution is just to begin to allow accounts to always register multiple emails? Although I guess the issue of multiple accounts is still going to exist if the users don't know the initial (private) email that they signed up with though unless there is a different unique ID that everyone will be able to remember. I'm curious (and not trolling by asking) what a solution might be since email has been used as a unique account identifier for so long it is hard for my brain to think of another option at the moment. | | |
| ▲ | weakened_malloc 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | Just a regular old username + password, kind of like HN allows? | | |
| ▲ | JoblessWonder 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | I feel like email overtook usernames because it was more likely to be unique/memorable. I hate when websites ask me to remember a username (even though I'm using a password manager so I should really just calm down.) | | |
| ▲ | bigstrat2003 an hour ago | parent [-] | | Usernames are no less likely to be unique and memorable than an email. You presumably chose something memorable for your email, so just enter that without the @foo.com bit. There, memorable and probably unique. |
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [deleted] |
|
|
| ▲ | HelloUsername 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| If your website needs an email address at all.. otherwise just use null@null.null, if it accepts and doesn't require a authentication code |
|
| ▲ | octoberfranklin 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| I guess you don't use github. It won't let you sign up with @airmail.cc. |