I was talking about the "educating people" part. I interpreted as "let's steer them away from Signal towards a better solution".
If it's not the intent then my comment is irrelevant
"The Department of State warning was supplemented by a message to US embassy staff from the ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, urging those that wanted to leave to “do so TODAY”."
I have a credible source that says they're scanning media being sent. They have a CSAM or related department. No idea how that works but I heard it exists. Can't find anything about it on the internet however to confirm
Opinion:
I think painting in Signal in such negative light is more harmful in the practical sense. Having fragmented messaging towards the public that does not care about many of these aspects just makes them a lot more hesitant to change, from my perspective.
We as a community should, in my opinion, pick a "good enough" solution for the majority of the people we interact with. That in itself is a market force to show interest and demand for private solutions.
Most people I know don't have the tools or knowledge or time to understand nuances and all they'll hear are conflicting messages.
For us more technically inclined people: hell yeah, let's figure out the ideal model and bring it up to maturity so others can join when it's fleshed out. E.g. when lemmy came to my attention in the reddit 3rd party app fiasco, I was really confused on how to sign up and use it. And I'm no stranger to tech.
Fair enough