That’s the key. It may very well be the wrong business decision to care about this 1%.
They're just true often enough that the company is better off declining to serve the few exceptions than it is trying to build things around the edge cases.
it makes sense to require email as a second captcha^H^H^H backup authentication thing^H^H^H mechanism we cant explain for your security which requires using one of the 4 remaining email services all of which cant be used without phone verification (btw all these will do things like, lock you out when you switch phone number which is even smaller space than IPv4). what if use different emails for two companies and they are corroborated at some point? do they think i'm identity hopping? but wait, should i be punished for using the same email for my games as my bank? is my email address my identity or should i use multiple to mitigate risk? oooooh i'm thinking too hard, it just makes sense because an adult on HN said they are also totally adults making these decisions based on sound reasoning. if i thought too hard that would also break the risk model because it would no longer be secret which is essential for it to work, and therefore i would be a criminal.
it makes sense that someone can just steal my money from my bank account because he spent an hour figuring out how it really auths you (actually they just learned all they need is the last restaurant you ate at and a rough amount you spent, totally not a guessable number) whereas i assumed just nobody having my password would be sufficient.
it makes sense that my keyboard, monitor, and speaker each have their own OS that takes 10 seconds to boot and also have remote code execution vulnerabilities, because none of that would ever matter for a casual user. it makes sense that my dishwasher doesn't work, that doesn't matter for a casual user since regurgitating crap onto the dishes only gives you disease 1% of the time, its green!
it makes sense that my random photo id is a password and i give it to 50 different companies because everything in the world is good.
some ceo said so, it all makes good business sense.
tl;dr you're literally just defending the garbage dystopia Richard Stallman warned about 70 years ago or whatever.
Businesses prioritize profit, not "safety" or whatever else you're talking about. Profit always comes first.
If enough people are being wrongly treated because companies won't (and arguably shouldn't) care about the harms they are causing, that's when government should step in and find a way to force them to stop acting in ways that we (those of us who aren't amoral monsters) deem unacceptable.
It sounds like it might be time for governments to step up and address this situation with fraud detection, but hopefully part of that will involve cracking down harder on the rampant fraud going on that caused these flawed detection systems to be seen as necessary in the first place
That's what's going to happen when you say "out of this other group, this 99% of people who I didn't want anyway, many of the Google Voice people were fraudsters".
Same thing for asking people to reverse a linked list on a whiteboard, or getting them to re-do their résumé, but in your HTML form instead of just emailing you their pdf. If you do ever get your dream candidate, you've pissed them off.
