Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by AsymetricCom 4624 days ago
All these other questions are dependent on context and out of scope of the argument.

The article argument in a nutshell is that validating email is hard, so don't bother, in fact, let users submit whatever they want including javascript. Then just check for @ and send it off to your next parser in the chain, in fact get lots of 3rd party parsers for misc features and send data to them first. spend effort fixing autocomplete so users can enter data easier that you will automatically accept. I'm sure this can only improve data quality...

I can imagine that wanting to know all the stupid shit your users submit as an email is the correct solution in certain contexts, but for a majority of cases, this article is wrong in everything that it suggests. Admittedly, there is very little context given.

Perhaps the context is "I don't care about security of my users or my services, and I will run whatever 3P code on my backend that appears to do the job of making a webpage look spiffy and easy to use. Once I have 10 Million (unverified) users, you sell your spaghetti factory and it's no longer your problem."

After all that, he recommends not letting people use software without a validated email address. Too bad he never bothers saying how he would get to that point, only how he would avoid doing to work.