In China there is no such thing as a throwaway number (at least outside of black markets). All numbers require ID to acquire.

For the US it would be a bit different. VOIP numbers do exist but they are often also blocked by services (this isn’t black and white but there are services that will quite accurately map numbers into ranges like home/cell/business/VoIP).

But of course the assumption would be that if they start requiring phone numbers for WiFi access the logical next step would be to make all numbers traceable to humans.

I really want to see which ones weren’t leaked. Those are obviously the most secure.

Then they’ll lobby against public WiFi. I was in China recently and (depending on the province) you need a phone number to access public WiFi so that they know who you are.

I also don’t mind if they are “selling” nothing, or just a supporter icon. As long as they are transparent that that is all you are getting.

I’m struggling to see how this actually made money. Because presumably the customer is paying for the delivery (as well as the food that was never ordered). So the fraudsters would just be paying themselves in a complicated way. My best guess is one of the following:

1. DoorDash is subsidizing orders so much that this is profitable overall (the amount they pay the driver is more than the customer pays) seems unlikely.
2. DoorDash is paying the driver multiple times but only charging the customer once. But if this was the case how was this obvious accounting issue never noticed? Shouldn’t the books come out even in the end?