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.