Encrypted RCS was. And it is proprietary.
They often presented specs that clearly showed security holes then simply would deny they were there or say “that’s secure”. It was a truly wild experience.
1) This tier of work is roundly invisible to almost everyone in the field. Many in the field are so confident in their knowledge of 'how things work.' that they simply can't accept the real 'in the room' realities of whats going on. Often engineers most of all, who are often deceived by their executives on the real goals. Are you and eng? Have you ever had that feeling of being gaslit by your VP? Yea you probably were, and you didn't know why.
2) Even at that level, I had a limited picture and a good extrapolation of what was going on in other rooms, but nothing I can say fully factually
3) No one wants to know. People love the just-so stories of these companies and really genuinely seem to get hurt/be in denial when they are faced with the reality that they are made up of ultra-selfish, shark like people with very little invested in the consumer, the company, or really anyone else. It's a game played to win for personal satisfaction. I've found that most people, simply cannot accept this.
I saw that you moved the goalposts in your reply, but anyway: which words?
> They aren’t even going to use the developed encrypted RCS protocol.
The protocol that was designed by Google and in which Google’s infrastructure is crucial? It’s not Apple’s fault that RCS does not have mandatory end-to-end encryption.
> I have intimate experience here with them both openly lying and purposefully deceiving their user base in this case.
Do you mean that they lied to you personnally? You should write about that, it sounds much more interesting.