While he makes a valid point I am worried about a few things he says:<p><i>Say there is only a 0.1% chance that in the next year Google’s servers have a search history leak </i><p>Sounds like meaningless speculation; and what does "leak" entail. Even if 0.1% <i>of the data</i> is leaked there is a pretty low chance that his data will be included - or if it is, obvious.<p><i>between all their sharing of data back and forth with the US government</i><p>Im not sure what this refers to; all data given under a subpoena should be a matter of public record at some point (at least it is here) and I was not aware Google handed out any other data to the government - if he has evidence of that it would be good to see it.<p><i>A Google search you made tipped off your local American authorities that you are breaking 16 USC 3370. Do Not Pass Go, Do Not Collect $200. Instead go to prison for 1 to 5 years after laying out up to $250k on a fine, unless you get an understanding judge.</i><p>Is this a scenario that exists? Answer is no. Of course I support the argument that this set up should never exist in the future - but I've not seen a suggestion Google would roll over to this lightly anyway.<p>Unfortunately this guy takes a good point to a somewhat surreal extreme - while that is often useful for pointing out flaws in things, his fruit example points out flaws in the law (which you could fall foul of in any number of ways beyond google searching) rather than making any specific point about privacy.<p>EDIT: any specific rebuttals? Did I get any facts wrong?