Hahaha! Oh wow! Let's see what "haters" means:
> One of the main criticisms [...] is that [...] it doesn't allow individuals to connect their own trusted servers [...] ("even though controlling the network is currently the only thing you can do to keep from being spied on," says Sunde)
I would say a controlled network creates a single point of failure and a narrow target for espionage (e.g. Lavabit).
> and that there are no plans to release the source code
Security through obscurity? Who wants audits from the community, when you can just call them haters, right?
> Sunde sees these critics as elitist. "We want to give decent encryption to everyone -- not just tech people. But the tech people are the ones who are really upset that they can't connect their own server. We decided quite early on to stop listening to them."
Who's the hater here? Is closed source/optional personal network really going to hinder massive adoption outside of tech circles? Does it matter at all?