I legitimately have no idea what this means.

> And how is essentially forking pgp with 'age' really going to solve things? Wow thanks another forked app! :^)

A big part of the criticism we've gotten when we tell people "PGP bad" is that we're not providing alternatives. age is one of those alternatives, for one of those use cases.

> It would be easier to just make a wrapper for gnupg that sets the settings for everything the author is talking about. (well most of the things the user is talking about) > Wouldn't it be easier to just inform maintainers of the package to change the default standards of packages like gnupg? Has the author even attempted to change some of these things?

As we mentioned repeatedly in the blog post: no, the PGP format is fundamentally broken, it is not a matter of "just fixing it".

> If you for example encrypt data without signing it, how would you know that someone isn't trying to poison ciphertext to extract data leakage or worse yet, they already found a way to decrypt your data and manipulating sensitive data?

I think you're making an argument against unauthenticated encryption here. That's true! You should not have unauthenticated encryption, the way PGP makes it easy for you to have. age is not unauthenticated encryption, so the criticism does not apply.