[JumpCrisscross]

> open standards that don't live in a silo are still important

Yes, I'd much prefer that Google and the carriers both have the opportunity to read all my communications instead of one or the other.

[Someone1234]

While the standard itself doesn't enforce any encryption, you could write an RCS based app that encrypts messages between endpoints. There are SMS apps that do exactly that, you just have the other contact install the same app and scan a QR code.

[lawnchair_larry]

No you can’t. Unless you want to chat with yourself. These things only work if everyone is using them without extra effort. That’s the point.

[Someone1234]

> These things only work if everyone is using them without extra effort.

It works fine without "everyone" using it. It can be used as best-effort security rather than a complete blanket.

[wu_tang_chris]

i'll have one iphone, please

[manigandham]

If you have to build it yourself then why even use it when there are existing options?

[chiefalchemist]

Is there one (or two) you'd recommend or suggest?

Maybe with a data via wifi fallback?

[Someone1234]

For RCS? I've not seen any yet, but the protocol is just getting off the ground.

[davvolun]

I could be wrong re: what OP intended, but "open standard" doesn't imply non-encrypted.

[pilsetnieks]

It's encrypted in transit but not end-to-end encrypted.

[davvolun]

Obviously responding to:

> Yes, I'd much prefer that Google and the carriers both have the opportunity to read all my communications instead of one or the other.

And I'm saying, regardless of the current implementation, just because it's an open standard, doesn't mean it can't be encrypted -- either in-transit or end-to-end.

Asymmetric cryptography, e.g. the TLS standard, is an open standard but secure (re: encrypted).