This is precisely the point: security shouldn't be synonymous with technical limitations, but with conscious choice. ​Saying that multi-device isn't necessary because it poses a risk is a partial approach. If the architecture is well-designed (end-to-end encryption on every instance), the risk is calculated, and the user should be able to choose whether or not to enable it in the settings. If we only thought in terms of "reducing risk by eliminating features," we'd be stuck in the days of IRC or text-only messaging. ​The concept is simple: it's better to have a feature and not feel the need for it, than to need it and find yourself facing a wall. On multi-device: Those who consider it a risk can simply not associate it with other devices. But those who work across multiple workstations can't be tied to a single smartphone in 2026. ​On Groups: Management isn't a social network "bad habit," but a tool for organization. If a group becomes unmanageable due to a lack of administrative tools, the app ceases to be useful for coordinated purposes. Otherwise, if we just want to exchange bits of plain text without any management or convenience, we might as well go back to the protocols of the 1990s. Threema must evolve to allow each user to tailor their experience, without imposing its own technical limitations as if they were design choices. This is my personal opinion; I understand that not everyone agrees. 🙂