> This has resulted in a too-familiar pattern, where tech companies based in the US make assumptions and decisions grounded in the instincts, perspectives, and

> This has resulted in a too-familiar pattern, where tech companies based in the US make assumptions and decisions grounded in the instincts, perspectives, and relatively narrow experiences of US-based engineers, designers, and product managers. This isn’t because the people at these companies are necessarily trying to project their view onto others. But we all are shaped by our context, and in the worst case, these assumptions are exported as though one size fits all. This sounds particularly tone deaf with them removing SMS support despite relatively vocal opposition. Signal made a one size fits all assumption, taking an extreme position that their users are just too stupid to tell unencrypted SMS messages apart from encrypted Signal messages, and so in the interest of "protecting the privacy" of their users, many are going to drop Signal entirely instead of enjoying the benefits of gradual encryption that Signal provided. In my experience convincing friends, relatives, acquaintances to give Signal a chance only worked because it wasn't just another useless app on their phone that they would have to use just to talk to me, it was a useful replacement with clear benefits - they could use it to talk to anyone, but we (and anyone else they convinced to join) could enjoy encrypted conversations, inside of the same app. Everyone IS different, that's why Signal is not for everyone, not anymore. It's just another app in the sea of communication apps and I don't see myself or any of the Signal contacts that I've onboarded sticking around.