Seems a bit upside down. Should they not approach Google for comment? If a stolen watch turns up at a carbooth sale, I'd in the first place want answers from the seller, not the victim.
> Seems a bit upside down. Should they not approach Google for comment? If a stolen watch turns up at a carbooth sale, I'd in the first place want answers from the seller, not the victim.
Search results indexed from the public web aren't stolen.
Private material exposed on the public web in contravention of the privacy expectation between the user to whom it belongs and the site owner with custody is a problem of the site owner exposing it, not the search engine indexing it.
So you are saying the Grok users publicized them (e.g. shared to anyone with the public link, then mailed the link via gmail)? How else would they be on the public web? Or did Google exfiltrated them somehow from a private source?
I'd be surprised x.ai freely aided a direct rival.
> So you are saying the Grok users publicized them (e.g. shared to anyone with the public link, then mailed the link via gmail)?
No, I explicitly said that the problem was the site owner (X/xAI) exposing private data to the public web, not an end user issue.
> How else would they be on the public web?
The most obvious way data users expect to be private that is in the custody of xAI and/or X (not really sure on exactly the division of responsibility between those two when it comes to Grok chats) would be available on the public web is one of those two companies fucking up and making it available publicly rather than restricting accesss. It something there are rrgular news items about firms with custody of data that should be peivate doing, and it is explicitly what I said upthread. Not sure where you got your elaborate Rube Goldberg scenario involving everyone other than the site owner with custody of the data.
> I'd be surprised x.ai freely aided a direct rival.
Yeah, direct aid to Google would be a lot weirder than them just fucking up privacy, which indirectly gets it on Google because Google crawls the public web.
"The BBC has approached X for comment"
Seems a bit upside down. Should they not approach Google for comment? If a stolen watch turns up at a carbooth sale, I'd in the first place want answers from the seller, not the victim.
> Seems a bit upside down. Should they not approach Google for comment? If a stolen watch turns up at a carbooth sale, I'd in the first place want answers from the seller, not the victim.
Search results indexed from the public web aren't stolen.
Private material exposed on the public web in contravention of the privacy expectation between the user to whom it belongs and the site owner with custody is a problem of the site owner exposing it, not the search engine indexing it.
So you are saying the Grok users publicized them (e.g. shared to anyone with the public link, then mailed the link via gmail)? How else would they be on the public web? Or did Google exfiltrated them somehow from a private source?
I'd be surprised x.ai freely aided a direct rival.
> So you are saying the Grok users publicized them (e.g. shared to anyone with the public link, then mailed the link via gmail)?
No, I explicitly said that the problem was the site owner (X/xAI) exposing private data to the public web, not an end user issue.
> How else would they be on the public web?
The most obvious way data users expect to be private that is in the custody of xAI and/or X (not really sure on exactly the division of responsibility between those two when it comes to Grok chats) would be available on the public web is one of those two companies fucking up and making it available publicly rather than restricting accesss. It something there are rrgular news items about firms with custody of data that should be peivate doing, and it is explicitly what I said upthread. Not sure where you got your elaborate Rube Goldberg scenario involving everyone other than the site owner with custody of the data.
> I'd be surprised x.ai freely aided a direct rival.
Yeah, direct aid to Google would be a lot weirder than them just fucking up privacy, which indirectly gets it on Google because Google crawls the public web.
X made them indexable to search engines. This is their security fuck up not Google’s