Run the AI Studio deletion test to show the chat isn't deleted

Jul 28, 2026 · 12:37 AM UTC · 0 reactions · 0 comments · 3 views

I’m asking everyone who uses Google AI Studio to help with something important. I already proved that the “Delete” button in AI Studio does not delete your chat from Google’s servers. It only removes the JSON file from Google Drive. The chat, the session, and the context all stay alive. This is not a bug. This is not an accident. This is intentional behavior. But one person proving it is not enough. If many people do the same test, Google cannot deny it. So please: help by doing the te...

About this source

Hacker News (AI / LLM) files mainly under ai. We currently carry 2,519 of its stories.

All Hacker News (AI / LLM) coverage →

Original article

Google AI Developers Forum

Read full at Google AI Developers Forum →

Story provenance

Source · retrieval · rights · ranking — open for full record

inspect →

Attribution is not the same as permission. This drawer separates discovery metadata, excerpts, WeSearch-generated summaries, reuse status, and whether the publisher receives the visit. Nothing here claims a legal grant the publisher has not made.

Record

Original publisher	Google AI Developers Forum
Canonical URL	https://discuss.ai.google.dev/t/please-help-do-the-ai-studio-delete-test-so-we-can-prove-that-google-does-not-delete-the-chat/174376
Publication time	Tue, 28 Jul 2026 00:37:10 +0000
Retrieval time	2026-07-28T00:58:14.655Z
Last seen	2026-07-28T00:58:14.655Z
Headline source	Publisher (no WeSearch rewrite)
Excerpt source	publisher description
Excerpt method	Publisher-supplied description / RSS summary field.
Summary	None yet
Summary source text	description
Citation coverage	No WeSearch summary has been generated for this story yet.
Cluster	ZzRfmny7LE-i · 1 stories
Cluster logic	Grouped by semantic title/content similarity across sources within a rolling window. Same-publisher template collisions are excluded from coverage comparison.
Ranking reason	Story pages are not engagement-ranked. Hub feeds use recency, with optional source-diversified chronological ordering (cap consecutive stories per source). No personalized ranking.
Publisher visit	Yes — open original
Substitutes article?	No — link-out required for full text

Rights status (four layers)

Publisher-declared

No publisher-confirmed rights record for this source yet.

Machine-readable

No source-specific machine-readable restriction detected beyond the public feed.

WeSearch interpretation

WeSearch declared handling (basis: Derived from the published RSS/Atom feed). This is WeSearch policy, not a legal grant on the publisher's behalf.

Unknown

Retrieval and training permissions are not asserted unless the publisher confirms them.

WeSearch handling by dimension

Indexing	May the item be indexed (stored, ranked, made findable)?	Allowed
Snippet	May a short excerpt of the publisher's text be shown?	Allowed
AI summary	May WeSearch generate its own short summary of the article?	Limited
Retrieval / RAG	May the content be exposed for third-party retrieval-augmented generation?	Not asserted
Model training	May the content be used to train AI models?	Not asserted
Commercial reuse	May the content be reused commercially?	Not permitted

Basis: Derived from the published RSS/Atom feed. Contact: [email protected]. Reviewed: 2026-07-24.

Open original publisher → Source rights JSON → Machine-readable provenance → Rights framework → WESEARCH-STORY-PROVENANCE-V1

Anonymous · no account needed

Discussion

0 comments