If you're homeless, you're getting robbed. It doesn't matter that a yubikey would be worthless to a person mugging you, they'll take everything including the worthless stuff. Or you're being picked up by an ambulance and taken to a behavioral health center after a mental health crisis and when they do that they take your clothes off and stuff goes missing, even if it's worthless.
Keeping the same number usually requires paying into an account which requires being able to make consistent payments, which is not easy to do. Or a credit card or bank account is required. You are maybe unbanked in this scenario.
> Why are we tackling the problem with caseworkers instead of something more ambitious, that would ironically be less costly in the long run?
Caseworkers make practically nothing. Does your solution get rid of human beings to act as agents for people who sometimes lose touch with reality? Will there be an AI assistant to guide someone through a schizophrenic break and get them to a hospital and help get them reoriented after they regain contact with reality? That's what's necessary and you're treating actually understanding what they're going through as if it's virtue signalling.
Could be just option hidden somewhere in the settings. Don't need to turn it off for all
> And the group we are trying to help isn't really better off.
That's just your assumption
They are a vulnerable niche, but a niche nonetheless.
Now let's talk about how much effort and what level of resources it's reasonable to expect a commercial entity to invest in extending protections to vulnerable people in need who happen to not be customers.
Perhaps we're asking the wrong entity to address this problem? This seems more like a public service infrastructure problem.
