This is a rather strange comment since we already know for sure that Google has already been hacked by both the British[1] and Chinese[2] governments. And of course the US government access information from Google without hacking: they just make legal requests, even when that means Google is breaking the law in other countries that they operate in.
The difficulty of compromising Google is to a large extent offset by the juiciness of the target. Google actually get compromised more often than the average savvy home user (which for most people I know is zero, compared to several times for Google). Not because Google is less competent, but because they are a hugely valuable target.
>> The risk of you being personally targeted and hacked is greater than Google being hacked
> This is a rather strange comment since we already know for sure that Google has already been hacked by both the British[1] and Chinese[2] governments.
With that fact established, the question still stands: who do you trust to not get hacked by the British and Chinese governments? The point GP was making was Google's security is pretty robust and if it's not sufficient, you'd be hard-pressed to find another service provider who can do better securing the data.
The difficulty of compromising Google is to a large extent offset by the juiciness of the target. Google actually get compromised more often than the average savvy home user (which for most people I know is zero, compared to several times for Google). Not because Google is less competent, but because they are a hugely valuable target.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MUSCULAR_(surveillance_program...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Aurora