As the use of Generative AI (GenAI) tools becomes more prevalent in interpersonal communication, understanding their impact on social perceptions is crucial. According to signaling theory, GenAI may undermine the credibility of social signals conveyed in writing, since it reduces the cost of writing and makes it hard to verify the authenticity of messages. Using a pre-registered large-scale online experiment (N = 647; Prolific), featuring scenarios in a range of communication contexts (personal vs. professional; close others vs. strangers), we explored how senders' use of GenAI influenced recipients' impressions of senders, both when GenAI use was known or uncertain. Consistent with past work, we found strong negative effects on social impressions when disclosing that a message was AI-generated, compared to when the same message was human-written. However, under the more realistic condition when potential GenAI use was not explicitly highlighted, recipients did not exhibit any skepticism towards senders, and these "uninformed" impressions were virtually indistinguishable from those of fully human-written messages. Even when we highlighted the potential (but uncertain) use of GenAI, recipients formed overly positive impressions. These results are especially striking given that 46% of our sample admitted having used such tools for writing messages, just within the past two weeks. Our findings put past work in a new light: While social judgments can be substantially affected when GenAI use is explicitly disclosed, this information may not be readily available in more realistic communication settings, making recipients blissfully ignorant about others' potential use of GenAI.