1) proprietary solutions in the age of surveillance capitalism.
2) offer in-browser cryptography to ensure security. I don't see any end-to-end encryption elements in that. Your data gets essentially delivered to the service. Do we really want that? Haven't the companies like FB already shown you should never trust them with your data? I mean, I'm baffled to see people would go in circles and instead of realizing the fundamental fault (lack of privacy by design), they go for the next vendor who promises not to abuse their data. Well no surprise there, for these services the business model IS the data. And it will never change unless they prove it won't be used by switching on E2EE and allowing anonymous registration and use via Tor.
At least back in the day Jitsi offered E2EE for VoIP and video with ZRTP + SRTP. I'm not sure what the case is now but people, think twice before you sign up to these "free" and fun one-click sites.
Umm what phone are you using? I hope you realize that contrary to what you think Android isn't completely open source and some of the most key parts are owned by probably the biggest enemy of privacy on Earth.
That's what we could call nirvana fallacy. Sure, the stack is never 100% free. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't use free and open source stuff where possible. Plus why should we use something that isn't E2EE by default. It's just FB all over again.
