Can we stop with the kneejerk reactions? This is a p2p browser extension, doesn't run through Google, wasn't developed by Google, the only involvement Google had was maybe fund it.
Are we going to be getting these comments any time Google is mentioned from now on?
Yes, and I think rightly so. What evidence do you have that this will not happen? None - which is the less evidence that the people saying it will happen have. Google has earned that rep and, until 1-3 years have gone in which they've not done something like that, people will continue to bring it up.
"This" being "shut it down"? My evidence is that this is a third-party extension, developed by a third party and doesn't touch Google's infrastructure at all. They couldn't shut it down if they wanted to. The most they could do would be to cut its funding, but it's still open source.
Almost everything they were fundamentally trusted on has turned out to be a betrayal. It is right and natural to question and distrust them until they have reestablished trust, which is likely to be a long process.
You will notice that as well as the appropriate distrust, there are also comments from people including yourself who have examined the proxy and determined that Google's trustworthiness is irrelevant to the trustworthiness of the proxy.
This is exactly how it should work. People are right to distrust Google, so the question should be asked. But we are also a technical community who can then analyze and understand the situation to determine whether concern is warranted.
The last thing we need is for people to silence their distrust and for scrutiny to stop.
I wouldn't mind people criticizing it if it's valid criticism, but this is just talking for the sake of talking.
Your argument seems to be that people shouldn't state their opinions, but should instead do silent research until they come to what you think is the obvious conclusion.
That isn't how social discussions work.
StavrosK wanted "valid criticism" and not "kneejerk reactions"; I don't think that's a fair interpretation of what he meant.
Perhaps it is a fact in our social environment that one cannot expect people to read more than the link title before making claims in comments, much less reading the FAQ (at https://uproxy.org/), but I wish it were not so.
Narrowly confining ourselves to a technical analysis of ignores that there are other dimensions to how people think about technology, and the perception that Google has created about its trustworthiness is one of them.
It's not as if we are going to explore that topic in a one-time thread and never say anything about it again. It is going to keep being discussed as related issues come up.