If you don't want your conversations to be public, how about you don't tick the checkbook that says "make this public." This isn't OpenAI's problem, its an idiot user problem.

I assumed this was a given. Anything offered to tech overlords will be monetized and packaged for profit at every possible angle. Nice to know it's official now, I guess.

Mine are not public, i use ~~a tinfoil~~ duck.ai.

Update 7/31/25 4:10pm PT: Hours after this article was published, OpenAI said it removed the feature from ChatGPT that allowed users to make their public conversations discoverable by search engines. The company says this was a short-lived experiment that ultimately “introduced too many opportunities for folks to accidentally share things they didn’t intend to.”

Interesting, because the checkbox is still there for me. Don't see things having changed at all, maybe they made the fine print more white? But nothing else.

In general, this reminds me of the incognito drama. Iirc people were unhappy that incognito mode didn't prevent Google websites from fingerprinting you. Which... the mode never claimed to do, it explicitly told you it didn't do that.

For chats to be discoverable through search engines, you not only have to explicitly and manually share them, you also have to then opt in to having them appear on search machines via a checkbox.

The main criticism I've seen is that the checkbox's main label only says it makes the chat "discoverable", while the search engines clarification is in the fine print. But I don't really understand how that is unclear. Like, even if they made them discoverable through ChatGPT's website only (so no third party data sharing), Google would still get their hands on them via their crawler. This is just them skipping the middleman, the end result is the same. We'd still hear news about them appearing on Google.

This just seems to me like people clicking a checkbox based on vibes rather than critical thought of what consequences it could have and whether they want them. I don't see what can really be done against people like that.

I don't think OpenAI can be blamed for doing the data sharing, as it's opt-in, nor for the chats ending up on Google at all. If the latter was a valid complaint, it would also be valid to complain to the Lemmy devs about Lemmy posts appearing on Google. And again, I don't think the label complaint has much weight to it either, because if it's discoverable, it gets to Google one way or another.

I mean... they are public. duh

Oh,boy. More.

Have you heard of timecube? Well here's mirrorcube

Ten times ten thousand pairs of opposite reflected extensions of you are doing the same thing - throwing the ball away from themselves toward their opposites and away from themselves, each one of each pair being the reverse of its opposite, and acting in reverse. YOU NOW KNOW WHAT THE ELECTRIC CURRENT IS, and that should tell you what RADAR is. Likewise it explains RADIO and TELEVISION. [See Principle of Regeneration, 3.13 - Reciprocals and Proportions of Motions and Substance, 7.3 - Law of Love - Reciprocal Interchange of State on Multiple Subdivisions]

It's so fucking insane

I'll probably have a target on my back because I kept asking it how to replace CEOs and other executives who do literally nothing but collect a paycheck and break shit.

Here's a good one

cape cod conspiracy

As for georges bank, it was made a national monument and are large ancient volanos that would be perfect for a alien base. There's also a line on google maps going from woods hole to there, and obama has a mantion off if king point road looking out into the ocean

Omfg

Should we be surprised? Thinking AI, the most data hungry undertaking in existence, was not storing the data from what you write? Especially when the companies behind it are the most invasive in history? Lol what else

Isn't that a good thing? If more people are using it without it being indexed, search engines would end up even more useless.

Even through duck.ai?

I use DuckDuckGo. :)