Phone Numbers as Identifiers

You also have the reverse problem which is alluded to in the article, that a Phone number for a non-traveller, is pretty static and unlikely to be changed by the user often. However Email is more disposable and I can spin up and shut down email accounts that I could register with Signal et., al. for what I believe to be sensitive communications.I feel that providers that use number-as-identity know this and use it as a way of assuring they have greater confidence of knowing their user, especi

Phone-number as identifier is pretty terrible user-experience choice. I am traveling and my phone-number has changed half-a-dozen times in the past year alone, my email has been the same for over a decade.I tend to use Whatsapp because other people already have it but I have absolutely no motivation to use encourage other people to use Signal.Edit: Whoever down-voted this, want to explain how this isn't a huge user-experience regression from giving your email and using gchat?

As someone who changes phone numbers periodically, I couldn't agree more. The worst part is all the services who use it as the only identifier. Services like WhatsApp, Signal, etc should AT LEAST offer an alternative means of identification, be it a user-chosen handle or an email address.

Phone numbers are more convenient in contrary to email: every individual has only one phone number, which hardly ever changes. They consider the phone number as unique identifier of a user.Many websites think that lots of users have multiple emails and thus maybe sign up twice. Again, it's only about convenience.

Your email is your identity. If they allow you to change your email, what they should refer you by, your passport number? Was kind of easier in the times of usernames, but these are long gone

It's not a hard concept, but it is a stupid one. Phone numbers for example you can take with you when you switch providers. Email has the provider hardcoded into your email address, thus every new provider means you have a new email.The Web still lacks a first-class concept of a user identify that you can take with you across servers.

I feel there is no relation to privacy here. It's also the practical choice. Emails can be easily created to by people pretending to be someone else. If you have someone's number on your phone, there is a good chance you have communicated with them before and have thus done some authentication. You can keep creating new email ids to spam people. That becomes very difficult with numbers.

1. If you need to reset your pw at any point, we need either your email or phone number. We don't ask for your email. A phone number is most likely tied to a real person.2. It's a unique identifier that allows you to add your existing contacts more easily. It's much more convenient than trying to figure out the usernames of all your friends and family.3. It's harder to automate creation of users by requiring a valid phone number, versus usernames (and potentially even e

ah yes, i didn't mean to imply an email address specifically, just that the other username would be mostly equivalent, if slightly inferior, to the phone number.i'm really glad that they're moving away from phone number as identity, and hopefully to fully anonymous, which they've rightly been criticized about up until this announcement.

With email addresses you can use multiple to not be too affected. But phone numbers are less replaceable than email addresses...And what's annoying is that more and more things now also require phone numbers (like, seriously, in the past an email address was enough but today the simplest thing you want to signup for uses some third party booking platform (which means yet one more party that gets to leak your data) that wants your phone number; even a railway company can't manage its