This is a silly thing to take issue with. I use a password manager. When I need a new password I allow the manager to generate one for me. Is the password inherently insecure or bad because it was generated by "a company" and not myself? Proton generates your key for you, just like a password manager does, and they've integrated that functionality into their service for ease of use, and probably ease of administration as well. There is no way someone can screw it up and not be able to read their emails if Proton handles it.

Encrypting email is extremely niche in the first place, the fact that Proton can enable it quickly and seamlessly for users with no prior knowledge on how this all works is a good thing imo. Everyone with just enough knowledge to think they know better seems to get annoyed by this type of thing and starts spreading ridiculous FUD even while Proton is enabling encrypted email for millions of people who otherwise would be using Google Mail. Don't get so caught up in the details that you miss the big picture of what Proton is actually providing.

The guys stance was pretty easy to follow even if he wasn't all that articulate. But they were never going to listen to him, so I don't know why he wasted his time. The main guy replying to him was doing the bad faith YouTube/Twitch debate style where instead of engaging a persons ideas, you simply select a few words someone has said and then hammer on them endlessly to put the other party on the defensive. Once you start trying to explain yourself and how you're not what they're saying you are, you've already lost. Very reminiscent of Destiny's debate style.

"I don't think laws should be made banning things adults like simply because a small percentage of children might try it."

"Really? So you don't care about children? Why do you want to lower safety requirements for children? I think you enjoy harming children."

Etc etc, and while you're off balance trying to defend against this non-sequitur they proceed to discredit you and anything you might say afterwards, no matter how valid it might be. It is intellectually dishonest, and all over this post.

Stuff like this feels weird at first but your brain gets used to it fast. I've switched to using the OpenDyslexic font on my Kindle and when you first see it, it's very weird. But after using it for many months I don't even notice that the letters are shaped differently anymore. Your brain will normalize the letters into looking like standard letters. I can only notice that the shape is different if I quickly switch between fonts. Using this has drastically improved my reading and attention span with much less fatigue.

I'm not sure if this bold method will have the same effect but if it does I think it would take some time to first adjust, and then stop seeing the bold letters as bold. In my experience with the OpenDyslexic font when you're focused on the difference, it's not helping, it's only when you stop seeing it and are focused on the content that you realize you're getting the content faster and with less work. Focusing on the letters themselves is doing extra work. If this method has utility it is in instant recognition without extra work. It's not really possible to understand if it helps from reading a blurb because you're going to be focused on the bold and not the content. I'd love to read a full book like this just to see how it feels.