I'm still waiting for the "other issues" to be explained that Signal supposedly has. I'm ok with my contacts knowing my phone number, and I opened the Signal account ages ago. Anything else to be concerned about?
However currently there are already better alternatives than Signal, so in my personal opinion I feel like that saying does not apply.
It's very fine if you (and most people) are OK with sharing some personal information with a United States organization. That does not mean that everybody is fine with that, or that it's a very good solution to a chat service problem. I'm glad that Signal is a good match for your needs. But there are those of us who would rather see a decentralized service with which no personal information has to be shared.
In these kinds of discussions, I often find it a little strange when others decide that a certain solution or product must be good for everyone only because they are fine with it themselves.
But I was asking for other issues, and you have not actually provided any?
Interesting to see this debate evolve.
Seems that phrase “perfect is the enemy of the good” is a relativistic argument. But the title’s frame is “ethics”, which one definition describes as “what is good in and of itself”. In that frame, perfection is the point, no? Though, I imagine you argue in this framework by elevating some aspects to that high standard, and work to convince other aspects are secondary. Otherwise, result is a preference argument where the trade offs you made are silent or obscured behind the practicality of your choices.