[vouaobrasil]

> Then you and the people you influence can continue to enjoy getting phished.

Yes, you are quite right (although I have never been phished). But the spirit of your answer is correct. But that was my point: there is no choice, except to be more tightly integrated into tech, which in my opinion is a horrible thing. Instead, we should lessen our dependence on technology so computer accounts aren't so important after all.

> Try to read up about a subject next time before you let your phantasy go wild and scare equally ignorant people away from more secure alternatives.

I am fully aware that passkeys are MORE secure. If you actually read my post, my argument was not TECHNOLOGICAL, but sociological: I argue merely that the tighter dependence on this technology is a bad thing sociologically, even if it is the RIGHT thing technologically.

My thesis is that passkeys are a symptom of tighter tech integration, perhaps an inevitable one. You are irate because passkeys are the better solution to a technical problem, but I nevertheless maintain that the existence of that technical problem itself is merely a side-effect of a much larger problem for society -- the dependence on a tightly-integrated vertical technology stack. So perhaps YOU should read into the subtelty of my argument before claiming that I am ignorant.

[ylk]

Are you intentionally ignoring the part where I provided reasons for why alternatives to the use of password managers by vendors that (supposedly) cause lock-in won’t go away?

It turns your fear into a hypothetical that you’re more than welcome to discuss but imo it’s disingenuous to frame it as the incredibly big problem you’re framing it as.

[vouaobrasil]

I disagree because the problem of internet lock-in exists today, not a hypothetical future. It is already a big problem.