I think I understand. Any acknowledgement that Google has done more to secure Internet traffic for normal users than any other company would require you to concede something, and thus feel bad.
Google has done an enormous amount to improve and deploy what Ben Adida called "b2c crypto" -- typically turning it on months to years ahead of its main competitors, and actively supporting work on making it stronger. But they've done almost nothing to encourage the use of "p2p crypto" in Adida's sense, at least not as a product feature.
I support the widespread routine use of p2p crypto, but I think Google deserves credit for what it has done. That includes making b2c crypto "routine" for most products, which does have direct effects on dragnet surveillance.
Of course Google deserves praise for that and 97 other things. But it is completely unapropos to what the article posted here is about. It does not really have an effect on dragnet surveillance because Google can be ordered to simply allow the government to let it happen.
There is some value in that foreign governments with their own NSA wannabes could get thwarted.
The problem is that Google would probably closed down if they implemented security which cannot be circumvented, even with a warrant, because they would break the law.
There are many laws and long standing rulings which force companies/people/.. to cooperate with law agencies. So, as it has been stated many times before, the solution for these things is political, not technical. Law always trumps programming and law is influenced by politics.
