Gmail registration now requires scanning a QR code and sending a text message
255 points
8 hours ago
| 23 comments
| discuss.privacyguides.net
| HN
dvh
4 hours ago
[-]
Any Gmail person can tell me why Gmail is tolerating Gmail phishing emails that use Google's own services (e.g. https://storage.googleapis.com/savelinge/... ?

More info here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46665414

reply
deng
49 minutes ago
[-]
Google is fine with everything if it's their service. I've completely blocked *.bc.googleusercontent.com, because it's basically used as a spam farm for years now, but Google couldn't care less as they apparently can't be bothered to even slightly inconvenience their compute engine users.
reply
torben-friis
3 hours ago
[-]
Spam is getting horrible lately. I get all sorts of new techniques including:

- using legitimate sites to bypass filters, like sending you a bill through a legitimate bill-creation site

- pretending to be a tracking service for something you supposedly ordered, then over the course of days pretending the package got lost on the way and offering a discount code for the 'purchased' amount, expecting you to use it on their phising site.

Gmail not only fails at spam classification, they classify these messages as important and nag you with first priority notifications and summaries.

reply
traviswingo
2 hours ago
[-]
I can’t prove it, but it feels like the world recently decided that spamming/scamming is acceptable, so the number of spammers/scammers has increased dramatically.

The number of spam calls, texts, emails, iCloud account unlock requests, etc I’ve received in the last year is insane.

reply
thewebguyd
18 minutes ago
[-]
Lack of accountability for the companies that allow their services & platforms to be used for spam/scamming.

Take DocuSign for instance. Still, this many years later, is a major source of phishing emails from their free trials. DocuSign could easily shut this down today by either requiring a CC for the trial, or forcing a call with a sales rep to start a trial. But they don't, they continue to allow their service to be used for wide scale phishing.

Atera, an RMM, is another one that has been a big source of malware delivery, also via the free trials.

Shutting down the trial accounts after the fact does nothing, the emails already went out.

reply
adrian_b
1 hour ago
[-]
I believe that these spammers now concentrate their efforts towards e-mail addresses hosted by major providers, like Gmail.

The reason is that I have an opposite experience, during the last couple of years I have received much less spam messages than before.

I have hosted my own e-mail server for more than 2 decades. Previously, I had to filter large quantities of spam messages, but lately the number of spam messages is much less than 10% of the total number of received messages.

reply
bix6
28 minutes ago
[-]
I’m considering self hosted. I’m so tired of the major providers not even trying. And I have no serious control over blocklists.
reply
bix6
28 minutes ago
[-]
AI + FCC weakening
reply
ryandrake
2 minutes ago
[-]
Not just the FCC but the entire regulatory apparatus is completely non-functional when it comes to regulating commerce.

The clear, unspoken message in the USA is now: "Enrich yourself in any way you can, as fast as you can. Buyer Beware is the law of the land."

reply
abirch
2 hours ago
[-]
It's AI that's doing a lot of it. For a lot of spam, scammers would want to exclude anyone who may not fall for the scam due to the costs associated with dealing with people who won't pay you. Now that AI decreases the need for a human scammer to scam, expect them to start to widen their scam nets.
reply
BLKNSLVR
2 hours ago
[-]
The decline had been happening long before AI hit mainstream.

It's been a _lot_ of years that I've hesitated to answer calls from unknown numbers.

reply
afavour
1 hour ago
[-]
Yeah this feels like one of those cases where the term "AI" gets broadened out so far it becomes meaningless.

This stuff is automated. The ability to automate spam calls (using the same form of APIs developers love, like Twilio) make it absurdly easy for one person to set up a spam machine. No AI required.

reply
mapt
1 hour ago
[-]
The lead generation was automated ten years ago ("Hello?"), but the actual scam conversation was not. Until recently, you still had to pay somebody in South Asia better than the prevailing wage of ~$1/hr to have these conversations, as well as set them up in an office with computers and managers, and bribe local police (call it $5/hr of fully burdened work product). If your success rate is ~1% and the average human portion of the scam lasts 12 minutes, you're getting 0.05 successes per hour, and you better be netting an average of $100 per successful scam (accounting for financial clearing issues / reversals!) or you're losing money on every hour worked.
reply
abirch
1 hour ago
[-]
You're correct about the calls, but the ability to talk with the people was the rate limiter. Even if you have many people in Cambodia or India, the scammers still needed to scam more than they paid out. Now you can have AI bots that do the first level of filtering.

Unfortunately scamming is a business and if certain actions become less expensive, I would expect more of them.

reply
torben-friis
1 hour ago
[-]
I think part of it is AI allowing sophistication at scale, but there's also a generational factor. The techbro + business shark culture, influencers who manipulate people being role models, and so on.
reply
cjbgkagh
15 minutes ago
[-]
Gmail spam filtering is so bad that I believe it has to be intentional. I think they see email as a long term ad revenue opportunity and want to desensitize people to the spam.
reply
thisislife2
1 hour ago
[-]
If I put on my tinfoil hat, it seems to be something deliberate, to push us all towards accepting hardware / software attestation and better "online id" stuff - "Don't you want to identify and stop the spammers and phishers?".

Email scanning and file scanning (on our computer) became acceptable when the level of spam and malware became intolerable. But it was at cost of our privacy. Today, Gmail scans all your mails and makes money from it. Both Windows and macOS have built-in anti-virus or malware scanners, and file indexers, and thus know all the applications and files in your system (which provides for more data on your profile with them). Now with both OSes, and even browsers like Chrome and Firefox, including AI, they will now use our own computers to not only collect our personal data, but even process it on our system and use it to build even better profiles to more profitably exploit us.

reply
Daishiman
13 minutes ago
[-]
It doesn't have to be deliberate; it's just the economic incentives at work. AI providers are inclined to sell AI to everyone with a pulse, and it just so happens that a lot of its use will for towards spam generation.

It also just happens that they're the ones best positioned to provide attestation and identity services.

reply
glitchc
33 minutes ago
[-]
Spam is now AI powered. Let that sink in for a bit.
reply
dewey
4 hours ago
[-]
The same reason spam filtering is hard. It's not possible to catch every misuse of the service without too many false positives.
reply
dvh
4 hours ago
[-]
The same 5 urls has been used for 3 months
reply
dewey
4 hours ago
[-]
That doesn't really change the fact that it's hard. Do you know how many full movies are on YouTube that infringe on copyright? How many pirated streams are hosted on S3? How many piracy sites are behind Cloudflare. It's just very hard to police at scale and if something is flying below the radar it will be there for a while. They probably spread out their assets over many accounts, or even use misconfigured buckets with write permissions to drop some files in there.
reply
BLKNSLVR
2 hours ago
[-]
Google's inability to scale their services should be a regulatory issue.

If their platforms (Gmail, YouTube, DoubleClick) are being used to launch scams, they're failing at scale and governments are failing at legislating / regulating.

The only way to use Google services somewhat safely is with hefty ad (and the rest) blocking.

All this ID and surveillance and privacy invasion and metadata retention and yet all these scams only seen to grow. It never seems to end up protecting anyone deserving of protection.

I wonder what it's all been in aid of...

reply
spaqin
3 hours ago
[-]
I kinda lost the plot here - what does piracy have to do with spam and phishing?
reply
em-bee
3 hours ago
[-]
both deal with distinguishing legitimate vs illegitimate content.
reply
unholiness
3 hours ago
[-]
reply
hydrogen7800
3 hours ago
[-]
"It's so easy when you don't know how". I'm not sure if this phrase is in common use at all, or if I just misheard it once and attributed it to mean that when the details of a problem aren't obvious, its easy to conclude the solution is simple. "Why don't they just do ___?"
reply
irishcoffee
2 hours ago
[-]
At the companies I've worked at, I refer to this as the "well, can't you just...?"

Yeah, I can "just" after I "just" do A, and B, and C, and D, and E, and F, and G.

Drives me batty on top of being insulting. "Surely you realize I thought about that weeks ago, and if it were that simple, we wouldn't be having this conversation."

But hey, I get paid every 2 weeks.

reply
cyanydeez
3 hours ago
[-]
Ok, it's even harder when you do not care because they people are either freeloaders or locked into your solution because it's a customized mess.
reply
tclancy
1 hour ago
[-]
Ah! I have no answer for it, but am happy, Virgil-like, to now have a theory why the same stupid, obvious "Costco" spam from an @gmail.com address keeps showing up in my inbox no matter how many I mark as spam.
reply
Aboutplants
2 hours ago
[-]
It follows the same logic as physical junk mail. We accept the fact that we will receive junk mailers in our physical mailbox and just toss them out.
reply
JoshTriplett
34 minutes ago
[-]
We shouldn't accept that either. The USPS could stop accepting junk mail, if it were funded properly and didn't have to rely on junk mail for revenue.
reply
mminer237
1 hour ago
[-]
There is a big difference between advertising your services and trying to literally steal people's money.
reply
000000000001
2 hours ago
[-]
Yeah, but junk mail funds the USPS, without it Republicans would've killed the postal service long ago, See the Pension requirement that they pushed in a vain attempt.
reply
Aurornis
3 hours ago
[-]
> Supposedly, using the QR code on the smartphone triggers an SMS sent from your phone to Google in order to verify your phone number.

Does anyone have a better source of information than this one forum comment from someone who thinks scanning a QR code is enough to get your phone to send a text message?

EDIT: It’s just an SMS URI. It doesn’t automatically send anything, just opens a text message for you to send.

This is just the old phone number verification with a QR code convenience method.

reply
mghackerlady
2 hours ago
[-]
What happens when your phone can't do that? I use a flip phone. It can't scan QR codes despite having a camera
reply
Aurornis
2 hours ago
[-]
Apparently it’s just an SMS URI.

It’s not something specific to a phone. It’s just a convenient method to enter your phone number.

reply
croes
2 hours ago
[-]
To enter their phone number because you sent an SMS to them.

So if there are any costs for sending this SMS it’s on you.

reply
user_7832
2 hours ago
[-]
Technically if you can copy paste the qr code into any qr reader website and manually do it, I think it's possible? Assuming it doesn't change the code very rapidly every few seconds.
reply
tom1337
2 hours ago
[-]
then google has decided that you no longer should be able to use GMail (for now) and the internet (in the future)
reply
mghackerlady
2 hours ago
[-]
eh, they gave up on trying to control usenet and haven't touched gopher so I'll just go there
reply
gruez
3 hours ago
[-]
reply
raincole
1 hour ago
[-]
But isn't phone number verification usually works like... Google sends you a SMS, not the other way around?
reply
q0uaur
1 hour ago
[-]
you see, in that case google has to pay, but flipping it like this makes the customers.. oh wait the product pay.
reply
noitpmeder
3 hours ago
[-]
I think it's probably enough to get your phone to open your texting app with a pre populated number and message body, then all the user needs to do is hit send.
reply
yawnr
3 hours ago
[-]
It probably opens a prefilled text message and the user still has to hit send. That's the only API I know on iOS anyway.
reply
philajan
3 hours ago
[-]
Can confirm this is what scanning the QR code does. I just went through this to get my Google dev account verified.
reply
goldenarm
2 hours ago
[-]
Regarding how easy simswap is in 2026, it's dangerously stupid from Google to rely on SMS
reply
qingcharles
51 minutes ago
[-]
I wish it was. I've looked everywhere for several years for anyone offering this service so I can get into my 2004 Google account that they enabled SMS 2FA on one day, without any notice, but it has the wrong phone number. I have the username, password and the recovery email address is set to another I own too, but without the SMS code I'm hosed.
reply
cute_boi
1 hour ago
[-]
I don't know why verizon etc.. don't charge like $0.25 cents per sms. Then these provider would stop sending too many sms.
reply
deltoidmaximus
1 hour ago
[-]
I recall reading that twitter was getting "scammed" because there were some phone services that cost money to receive texts (and possibly some of it was being passed on to the customer of said phone service) and they were getting spammed with phone verifications to get the payouts. I guess when twitter extorts your phone number out of you under false security pretenses and then uses it for advertising that's legit but if some one tries to a get a cut for themselves it's a big problem.

It occurs to me this "force you to send the sms" might be a way to avoid exactly this sort of thing.

reply
8cvor6j844qw_d6
4 hours ago
[-]
Recently helped a small business set up a Google Workspace account and we hit a wall during registration.

Told the owners that if Google is already being difficult during signup, imagine being locked out later with client work on the line. Pulled up a few horror stories about Google lockouts to drive the point home. They ended up with another workspace solution.

reply
bilalq
1 hour ago
[-]
When trying to upgrade from the Business Standard to Business Plus plan, Google will reduce your workspace storage from 2TB/user to 0 bytes for up to 24 hours while it upgrades you.

These are actual quotes from support:

> Upon checking, I see that the storage is showing as 0 bytes, because of the upgrade that has been done from business standard to business plus. Not to worry as this is very normal.

> I understand your concern and how important it is for the storage to be updated due to the business requirements. > > To give you full transparency into what is happening: when a Workspace subscription is upgraded, our backend systems must first detach your previous Business Standard storage allocation before provisioning the new Business Plus limits. During this transition window, the quota temporarily defaults to zero.

> Now please turn ON user storage limit nor shared drive storage limit. Once you turn ON, please wait for 5 minutes and then please turn it OFF.

^ That last attempt to try to force storage quotas to reset faster didn't work, btw. Still took hours.

reply
gedy
1 hour ago
[-]
Google Workspaces are just like Windows 11 on the network, and constantly running Windows update. You never know what changes, installed/uninstalled, or breaks.
reply
remus
27 minutes ago
[-]
I feel like I must be using a different gogole workspace. I've used it every day for the last 10 years and just don't seem to have these issues? Stuff just seems to work for the most part? It's all way more stable and low-admin than any other desktop software I've used at least!
reply
bborud
1 hour ago
[-]
This is why I have I have started planning to transition away from Gmail for all domains I manage. Gmail doesn't actually get any better as a product - just more annoying as they try to upsell me on crap I don't want or need. It gets a bit more shitty every year.

The sheer size of Gmail means I have zero chance for support even though I pay for a service. The risk is too great to be acceptable.

reply
Aurornis
3 hours ago
[-]
> and we hit a wall during registration.

What does this mean? The scanning a QR code and sending a text message from this article, or something else?

reply
super256
4 hours ago
[-]
With which workspace solution did they end up with?
reply
p0w3n3d
3 hours ago
[-]
I assume "next leading brand" ;P
reply
cromka
2 hours ago
[-]
Hopefully that means Nextcloud ;)
reply
thisislife2
1 hour ago
[-]
No idea, but there's Zoho.com ...
reply
dakolli
59 minutes ago
[-]
Cloudflare for email people, its the best and free
reply
thrownaway561
3 hours ago
[-]
Everyone hates on Microsoft, but their platform is 50x better than Google. Personally nowadays I would be looking at Proton if I was going to setup a workspace for my company.
reply
windexh8er
3 hours ago
[-]
This is hilarious. Microsoft has had many issues and outages with M365 in the last few years. I mean, I guess if you don't rely on mail, then sure.
reply
SV_BubbleTime
2 hours ago
[-]
We are 365 shop… I cannot think of one single time the 365 being down has affected us at all. Maybe you’re right I don’t know. Maybe your region is worse than my region.
reply
b112
3 hours ago
[-]
If one takes the comment to mean, 50x better for support, I can believe that. After all, 50x almost nothing can be achieved fairly easily.
reply
nottorp
1 hour ago
[-]
Maybe MS actually has support. The UI is so much worse than Google's (which is bad enough for communication compared to Slack) that you just cannot win though.
reply
arjie
2 hours ago
[-]
I went through it to register just now. No QR code required. Same flow as it has been for years:

1. Personal/Child/Business

2. First/Last

3. Pick email

4. Date of Birth

5. Backup email / Skip

6. Password

7. Enter phone number

8. Confirm with 2FA code

9. Done.

I just made the email testregistrationflow@gmail.com and have since forgotten the password. So that’s one burned. But feel free to try testregistrationflow1@gmail.com and see if it works without a QR code.

The headline is clearly a misstatement of what is a specific flow for someone to make many Gmail accounts programmatically.

reply
flumes_whims_
1 hour ago
[-]
Probably depends on how "trust worthy" you seem to Google for them to trigger this requirement. Things like using Linux, using Firefox, using a VPN, etc.
reply
greentea23
19 minutes ago
[-]
The irony is that no real scammer would use this setup because they know it would stand out.
reply
sevenseacat
9 minutes ago
[-]
Yeah I set one up a few weeks ago for testing, same process.
reply
Gander5739
1 hour ago
[-]
When you create an account through google services on a phone, you don't even need a phone number.
reply
guidedlight
1 hour ago
[-]
They should probably go back to the original invite only flow they used when Gmail launched.

Every account having the ability to invite an only small finite number of new accounts is one way to thwart scammers.

reply
saltcured
1 minute ago
[-]
Not without some kind of delay function and probably filtering/evaluation of which new accounts get this capability...

Everyone here should be familiar with exponential growth of n-ary trees. If you can get one of these accounts and each new invitee gets to invite 2 more, you can already have accounts gone wild.

reply
lokar
58 minutes ago
[-]
It was not finite, or uniform. I refilled the invites every week or so based on user behavior.
reply
sixhobbits
1 hour ago
[-]
Not really, even "legit" marketing providers have massive automation rigs to warm email addresses, make them behave naturally and email each other in rings for a bit before using them for cold outreach.

So they'd just do this to farm invites if they needed

reply
cute_boi
1 hour ago
[-]
I just checked and it asked me to scan QR code and after opening QR code it will attempt to send some random token..

Google is probably doing A/B testing or they are using some sort of ML algorithm....

reply
Almondsetat
1 hour ago
[-]
"A tester in A/B testing situation swears that B tester is not telling the truth"
reply
arjie
1 hour ago
[-]
It certainly disproves a headline saying “Gmail now requires scanning a QR code”.
reply
warkdarrior
7 minutes ago
[-]
Well, a headline that states that “Gmail now requires scanning a QR code for some people some of the time” is not too exciting.
reply
oldherl
1 hour ago
[-]
Wechat (Weixin; 微信) from Tencent has been doing this for years. Now Google is becoming the new Tencent and the US is becoming the new China
reply
warkdarrior
6 minutes ago
[-]
Do we get cheap EVs and high-speed rail now?
reply
mikestew
1 hour ago
[-]
Is this the reCAPTCHA crap I just ran into minutes ago? It’s the Cloudflare “verify your humanity” thing, and the checkbox isn’t good enough, so now there is a “mobile verification, the support page for which (that I briefly skimmed) talks about scanning a QR code.

(EDIT: TFA didn’t clear it up for me, but it sounds similar.)

reply
saaaaaam
40 minutes ago
[-]
I tried to create a new gmail address recently because my primary gmail address is my name, and it's quite common, so I get more email for other people than I get for me.

My phone number - which I've had for about 15 years and have only ever used for personal purposes (minimal SMS, mainly just an iMessage/Whatsapp ID) - is apparently "not eligible" to create a new gmail account. Which is quite strange.

reply
throwa356262
38 minutes ago
[-]
If this is with a new android phone, return it and let the manufacturer know why you couldn't use the phone.
reply
aboardRat4
25 minutes ago
[-]
If he had this phone for 15 years, I bet it's not bound to a phone, it's bound to a sim card.
reply
AstroBen
27 minutes ago
[-]
Register your own domain and use that for your email, and you'll no longer be held hostage by Google. Takes almost no effort and will cost you a few dollars a month.
reply
lenerdenator
25 minutes ago
[-]
> and will cost you a few dollars a month

Dead on arrival.

reply
AstroBen
4 minutes ago
[-]
If you don't feel that's worth it you can use Gmail, yeah.
reply
lenerdenator
15 seconds ago
[-]
It's not just me; most people won't. That's the issue.
reply
opengrass
4 hours ago
[-]
I got this a few weeks ago, it was a URL like "sms?:number" which tries to pre-fill text in app. Didn't work for me (Fossify) so I had to copy the number and verifier text from that URL and send it manually. It's for saving money spent on providers like Twilio.
reply
rexthonyy
5 minutes ago
[-]
How could they.
reply
DivingForGold
3 hours ago
[-]
Won't be registering any new gmail accounts in the future and will gladly dump the ones I have if Google tries to force obtaining my phone no.
reply
everdrive
1 hour ago
[-]
Thanks for the update. I've been meaning to fully move away from gmail. It's clear that now is the time.
reply
vachina
1 hour ago
[-]
Google is trying to retain the value of their userbase, because many third party services use Gmail auth as a signal for low fraud risk.
reply
reconnecting
4 hours ago
[-]
Gmail has been evil both for client privacy as they use email scanning for marketing purposes, and for 'spam' filters that reject legitimate emails.

The fact that they're introducing QR/SMS/MMS/whatever they want is actually an interesting signal, because it will harm the customer experience, which might result in the growth of responsible paid email services.

reply
rapnie
2 hours ago
[-]
> Gmail has been evil

It is good to realize that it has never been "Nice Uncle Google" and always an advertisement moloch offering tools to hook their product. All that trust that was bestowed was never warranted.

reply
riddlemethat
4 hours ago
[-]
The only “real” competition for Google Workspace is Microsoft if you need a full collaboration solution beyond just email, and 99.999% of customers of such hosted solutions need that full solution. It’s why Dropbox worked even though hacker news users probably roll their own sync solution.
reply
reconnecting
3 hours ago
[-]
Tuta, Fastmail, and Posteo are all much better alternatives to Gmail in terms of privacy.

My comment, as per subject, is about Gmail.

reply
daft_pink
3 hours ago
[-]
His point was just that many business users can only purchase Google’s solution or Microsoft’s solution, because they’re the only services that will offer interoperability with many other security and compliance services and advanced functionality like SSO, third party email scanning, compliance journaling etc. The email market is essentially a duopoly as soon as you need any functionality beyond basic email.
reply
windexh8er
3 hours ago
[-]
The simple fact that you believe this is insane to me. Microsoft?Security and compliance? Ahhh, yes the north star of security!

No, you don't need either of these companies if you need a corporate stack for communication and collaboration. And anyone who believes Microsoft or Google is doing anything out of the ordinary to protect their users or data is out of the loop.

reply
aboardRat4
22 minutes ago
[-]
>No, you don't need either of these companies if you need a corporate stack for communication and collaboration

A lot of corporate (customer) email sevices drop email from everybody except a very short whitelist.

reply
nathanaldensr
3 hours ago
[-]
It's not about actual security; it's about the appearance of it. It allows CTOs and such to check a box to say "Why yes, our vendor is secure! Look at all their claims! Look at how many other companies use them!" That's it. Safety in numbers for clueless CTOs.
reply
Retr0id
50 minutes ago
[-]
fwiw I was able to set up a fresh google account without SMS via a used android device (with no SIM installed), 2 days ago. But I suppose on balance, having a second device is more onerous than having a second SIM.
reply
CWwdcdk7h
3 hours ago
[-]
Last time YouTube wanted to verify my phone number it was easier to find a free service to receive SMS than for Google to deliver it to my actual phone. And Google didn't care I "verified" a number assigned to other side of the world.
reply
weberer
22 minutes ago
[-]
Be careful. Google once locked me out of an account that I've owned for over 10 years one day. My username and password were correct, but they randomly flipped 2FA on (without my consent) and sent the recovery code to a phone number that I switched away from years ago. It was completely unrecoverable. There's absolutely no way to get in touch with customer service. Never make an account with them unless you're not willing to lose it randomly to automated bureaucracy.
reply
qingcharles
48 minutes ago
[-]
What happens when they ask for you to get another code to that same number, though? Can you access that number again?
reply
mghackerlady
2 hours ago
[-]
It's becoming increasingly hard to find a service that lets you see verification messages, and even then google doesn't like a lot of the numbers those services use
reply
medvidek
1 hour ago
[-]
In my country there are several telco operators that will send you basically an unlimited number of SIM cards for free (as in free beer) that you can use for getting the verification SMS and then immediately throw the SIM away. The only "cost" is that you have to wait a day or two for the SIMs to get to your physical mailbox.
reply
Imustaskforhelp
1 hour ago
[-]
Yes I had the same issue and wrote an hackernews comment[0] and was gonna write a blog post but laziness (but I am glad that privacyguides wrote an article!)

I also want to share a comment that someone (Velocifyer) added on my comment:

"If you make a blog post, make sure to also comment on how the audio reCAPTCHAs are nearly impossible and are blocked on public VPNs. The visual reCAPTCHAS have vauge instructions (they say “Select all squares with busses.” when they mean “Select all squares that have a bus or part of a bus and do not select any other squares.”. For 2 years I could not figure that out so I had to use the audio captchas but then Google blocked them on public VPNs and also made them almost impossible. I could only figure that out when Google Gemini clarified it for me."

Also another fact that I had discovered but to upload youtube vidoes more than 15 minutes you have to do this verification with sms and I found that its system of sending sms was quite finnicky and (too much limits is actually just one try)

Google and other tech giants's recent changes/lobbying are really impacting the open internet and it feels to me like we as people who have knowledge about these topics must do something to reform things as I simply cannot ask people who are technically unaware about these topics to fight for these changes unless we advocate and educate them about it

Most people just have simply way too much of other issues to fight for these things that they have almost taken for granted, but this to me means that the responsibility is on us people who are technically sound to fight against the attacks on open internet if we wish to preserve it.

I think my point is that we all might be waiting for other people to protest against these tech giants but I think that the world is looking at us people for such protests, Let's hope that we are able to educate more people and the open internet is preserved.

Our small steps might mean a lot in the future and so to not be dis-illusioned to make small steps thinking that they might be too small but we have to fight tech giants if we wish to preserve open internet. Every step is meaningful no matter how small

[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48042596

reply
dsr_
3 hours ago
[-]
... and gives me a message on my primary phone: "This number has been used too many times."
reply
soopypoos
9 minutes ago
[-]
Your identity is invalid. Report to the nearest Protein Distribution Hub for reallocation.
reply
xchip
2 hours ago
[-]
I also receive too much spam, I'll believe in their AI whenever they are able to fix spam.
reply
aboardRat4
21 minutes ago
[-]
spammers also use AI
reply
tamimio
1 hour ago
[-]
This is not new, back I think in Feb when I registered a new one, it did ask to send an SMS instead
reply
jmyeet
3 hours ago
[-]
Everything is going to get so much worse and AI really is to blame. So many websites now have these verification pauses and CAPTCHs because of AI agents. Part of it is agents. Part of it is everyone running their own awful versions of Googlebot.

Years ago IIRC there was a "bug" where the Android emulator allowed you to create real Google accounts. This was found and I'm sure millions of these accounts were created. There's a whole black market for Google accounts. Whereas I lost a Google account I'd created for a relative because it hadn't been used in awhile and it was tied to a mobile number I no longer had.

I don't see how this ends without registering for a service like Gmail being tied to your government ID.

reply
findbizonline
8 hours ago
[-]
When did it start?
reply
spwa4
4 hours ago
[-]
The real problem for privacy is that governments are increasingly outsourcing the verification of identity and bot protection to private companies.
reply
aboardRat4
19 minutes ago
[-]
And what do you expect instead? To get a Russian gosuslugi ID, you also need to bind your phone and ID number.

And of course their database is leaked in real time.

reply
carlosjobim
3 hours ago
[-]
Outsourcing? Governments have never been involved in bot protection or online identity verification for anything else than their own websites.

It's like saying that the government has outsourced burger making to McDonalds.

reply
aboardRat4
17 minutes ago
[-]
LiveJournal allows verification with Russian State ID "gosuslugi".
reply
red_admiral
1 hour ago
[-]
Estonia is the exception here, not sure about the other Baltics. Switzerland is trying. The UK is trying to try.
reply
spwa4
1 hour ago
[-]
I do mean for their own websites.
reply
carlosjobim
25 minutes ago
[-]
Thanks, now I understand your comment.
reply