This is the part that resonated with me the most as the casual user. The interface is, so confusing that the differences between various forms of chats seems deliberately unclear. And all that's "useful" is opt-in. And Groups - most used in corporate or project setting, can't be encrypted at all? That's... peculiar.

Again, thanks for the eye-opener.

No, I can't stress enough how much I appreciate it. What I do right now is sending this article with TLDR to all my friends and family.

Any advice for people that used it in the past? After reading the article, my understanding is that what was sent in "private chat" was in fact encrypted (for the most part) and can be considered secured (to the degree - something is off and, maybe we didn't find out yet, how the encryption is compromised). But it would wise to treat all other conversations as something that is compromised. Is this a fair summary?

Well, it was obvious to you. I'm a casual user, who tries to "do his best" and consider himself "somewhat informed" - obviously not by your standard. It was all news to me, and I find tremendous value in this article.

Go for the Owls and sent the letter up with a rumor that the De-Gnoming procedure is about to start. They are not that bright. They will run down to you.

Is open-source washing really a thing? Any examples come to mind?

Sounds like a glass that's half-full to me.