Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't get your point here. You start off by questioning if the threats are realistic, then questioning if they're even possible, then you end by saying it's not that bad because waitresses can overhear your conversations too. 1) Those threats are 100% possible and realistic. If you think they're not just because the guy in this article is a contractor, then you're being incredibly naive and shortsighted. 2) Google…
Why do you think "Google employees have full access to this data?" It seems strange that they would have permission, unless there were some reason it was necessary for the job. This is sort of like assuming telephone company employees can listen to whatever conversations they want. Wiretaps exist, but it's not like just anyone gets to use them.
> Why do you think "Google employees have full access to this data?"
Because they do. It's literally there on their servers. You're assuming that they have some really good policies to prevent employees from accessing that data. Maybe they do, I don't know. But it doesn't matter because those are just internal policies. If some employee just says "fuck it" and ignores those policies, then if they're caught they'll just be silently fired and we'll never hear about it. There's no external audit; this is all unregulated territory.
Since this is HN, I'll give you a scenario that might hit closer to home: let's say you want to apply to work at Google. You send in your perfect application/resume, but you never hear back because your recruiter peaked into your Google Home files and noticed that you once told your friend that the Dodgers suck. Since your recruiter is a Dodgers fan, they decided to just throw your resume in the trash.