They do, it's just not a-grade plastic that will deform instead of crack into sharp pieces and pierce your eyes should you swing your hammer and break open a geode and it chips and a rock flies to your eye at the speed of... very fast...The goggles, they do nothing.
It just means that no thirdparty can, as a man in the middle, read what is being transmitted. Once it arrives, it's probably stored unencrypted (or encrypted with a known key) it buffers the incoming data and sends out a copy once every 15 minutes (see my post): https://pyra-handheld.com/boards/threads/the-communication-cube.59464/post-1702108Facebook doing damage control marketing on UK radio stations (e.g. LBC) with the strap line “with end-to-end encryption, no one - not even WhatsApp - knows what’s being* sent”, the day after the Electoral Commission’s report detailing the content of private WhatsApp messages between Johnson and Lord Brownlow proving that Johnson lied to Lord Geidt about inappropriate payments to the Tory Party ostensibly for No.11 Downing Street refurbishment...(for which the EC fined them close to the maximum possible)
*notice the tense used here: it doesn’t say that they can’t know in the future what’s already *been* sent
It might. Wait in transit until the receiver connects, and fetches the encrypted data. It gets decrypted, and then, because you said to "store all my messages on the cloud so I can restore my Facebook WhatsApp", it is then send unencrypted back to your cloud storage. To be indexed, analyzed, pictures crosschecked with FB app and people on the pictures annotated, not in your picture, but in a hidden profile, as to create better connections between people; even when not in their application (as they already do in FB)That's not end to end then. For end-to-end encryption the two end points should be in communication and set up some private shared key using something like RSA, then encrypt is so that only the end user can read it. If it's not doing that then I wouldn't describe it as end-to-end personally.
With the risk of sounding pedantic. Yes, the "you" is "when one", a generic person that uses the defaults...To be clear, I said no such thing, but I expect the 'you' you used there wasn't specifically referring to me, but instead to the hypothetical person being hacked in this case.