<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Accounts on VisorCraft News</title><link>https://www.visorcraft.com/news/tags/accounts/</link><description>Recent content in Accounts on VisorCraft News</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-US</language><lastBuildDate>Thu, 10 Sep 2026 06:00:00 -0500</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://www.visorcraft.com/news/tags/accounts/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>The "No Account" Pattern: Design Choices for Privacy-First Apps</title><link>https://www.visorcraft.com/news/2026/09/no-account-pattern-privacy-first-apps/</link><pubDate>Thu, 10 Sep 2026 06:00:00 -0500</pubDate><guid>https://www.visorcraft.com/news/2026/09/no-account-pattern-privacy-first-apps/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;The sign-up screen is the most quietly dishonest component in modern software, because it presents itself as a service to you, a way to keep your stuff safe and synced and reachable, when its actual job is to anchor you to a row in somebody else&amp;rsquo;s database so that billing, retention metrics, and the occasional marketing email have somewhere to attach. We noticed this the way you notice most things, by building apps and realizing the account system was the single largest feature we were about to write that our users had never once asked for, so we stopped writing it, and across Roamarr, Foxden, SpiderTypes, Sinema, and Tailshell there is no account on our infrastructure anywhere, with the one honest wrinkle being the local users that live on your own server where an app genuinely needs them, and the part worth writing about is not the privacy posture but what happens to your data model when the users table stops being ours.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>