Plus, this service requires that you trust Google to store that data which, for the third time, is not exactly great given their collusion with agencies like ICE (something you've ignored repeatedly now). In the age of NSPM-7, this is absolutely a concern worth agitating about: https://www.aclu.org/news/national-security/how-nspm-7-seeks...
Also, this service requires you to trust that Google spends enough money preventing intrusions which, if you've been following infosec news, is no longer even a modicum of a priority for them: https://x.com/loobeny/status/2049942398416122250
You had a strong reaction. Now you're digging a hole, ignoring points that detract from your reactionary thesis, and ignoring the wider context in order to focus on an accusation fully based on your specific interpretation of my writing, not the substance of the content. If you want rational discourse then you should do better than simple sophistry - just because you have some pet peeve that you globally accuse all HN commenters of having doesn't make it more true. Those who claim they have no confirmation bias are the ones who are the most likely to have it.