Did you even read the linked thread, of a person apparently actually working with homeless people? It explicitly mentions that email is the preferred method of communication for many of them, for reasons also mentioned in the thread.

> The homeless have challenges, no doubt, but that does not imply google worrying about 2FA for the homeless is the best way to solve those challenges.

You seem to be under the impression that improvements to the condition of people's lives are only ethically acceptable if they happen ordered strictly by descending impact. In my experience, that's not realistic.

And you seem to think doing the easiest thing is actually useful.

Yes, I do think that doing something useful is useful, even if it is easy.

and thus does the problem continue because those who could help are too busy making themselves feel better with as little effort as possible.

It's 2FA ... for homeless people.

Partial solutions that take minimum effort are great. It's like replacing a single incandescent light with an LED. Sure it doesn't solve climate change, but it definitely helps, and doing easy helpful things is way better than not doing them and complaining that the problem is big.

pretty much every ineffective strategy has been rationalized at some point.

email implies internet, 2FA implies realtime internet. The lack implies very poor at the very least up to and including homelessness.

"this one company uses 2FA, we should bitch at them until they remove that need" doesn't actually help anything.

This person who posted the tweet could offer their personal phone, email, and internet for these homeless friends they have. Why don't they? I bet they'll say it's because it doesn't solve the "real" problem.

Yeah, neither does asking google to spend money on removing 2FA for the homeless.