[mrweasel]

> Essentially, there are hardly any valid grounds for any platform to permit the utilization of frail passwords, especially considering how effortless it is to create distinct passwords using a password manager nowadays.

One was just given: Users don't really care to create an account to begin with, so they provide throwaway email accounts and low security passwords. If the apps required longer, safer passwords, then they risk losing signups.

If I get a message complaining about my password being to weak, from a service I might not care that much about, then there's an increased risk that I opt to not create an account.

Apple solution is actually pretty good, it allows me to quickly create an account to try out an app or service. If I don't like it, meeh, they only have the Apple login info and nothing else.

[BoxFour]

It's clear that platforms don't view it as a major obstacle to registrations. Or, at least, not a hassle that weighs significantly against the issue of unauthorized access to accounts and, to put it bluntly, articles of this nature that tarnish their reputation.

Considering the ongoing trend towards the use of robust passwords rather than their abandonment, we can infer that either the impact on meaningful engagement hasn't been substantial or the decrease in signups is deemed overwhelmingly worthwhile in order to combat spam and other unfavorable aspects.

So, I stand by what I said.