The prompt is not the JSON! The two are not the same and everyone needs to understand this. The prompt is server‑side, not the JSON file in Drive that I restored with the recovery test. That file is only a pointer required for the prompt to function.What is a prompt?A prompt is an input instruction or question given to an artificial intelligence system, based on which the AI generates a response or content. The more precisely the prompt is formulated, the more relevant and useful the AI’s answer will be.The “delete prompt” button in AI Studio is lying, because it deletes the JSON, not the prompt, when you click it. And when I restore it with the Drive robot and the prompt (the chat) starts working again, that proves that Google never actually deleted the prompt.Because the button claims this:“Move prompt to trashAre you sure? Your prompt will be permanently deleted after 30 days.”This is logically incorrect, as I mentioned, and it can also be considered deceptive. Not only does the prompt come back after restoring the JSON, but the button shamelessly lies to the user, claiming that the prompt is deleted, when only the JSON is placed into the Drive trash!!! Nothing else, only the JSON file goes into the Drive trash.So it’s not the prompt. It’s the JSON!After 30 days the prompt (the chat) disappears from AI Studio only because the Drive trash is automatically emptied, therefore the JSON key for the prompt is removed, and the chat cannot load. Google cannot deny this. They wrote this nonsense on the interface themselves!Google KEEPS the prompts, because it is provably not deleting them. People don’t understand this and they don’t stand with me! This is a shame!!!One of my posts about chat restoration:
The NOYB has officially confirmed that they are already investigating Google’s practices regarding deleted data.
This is not deflection, not PR talk, not “maybe someday” — the investigation is already underway, and they are considering whether to file a complaint against Google.
And while a European data protection organization is already breathing down Google’s neck,
Google remains completely silent and has not responded to:
a single official reporting email address,
their DPO on anything,
registered letters,
any formal inquiry,
or any legal or technical question about what the hell they are doing with deleted data.
This is not a “communication issue.”
This is not a “misunderstanding.”
This is deliberate silence — the kind that happens when a company has no legally defensible basis for what it is doing.
The post I published, and the screenshot, are evidence.
They are not about NOYB, they are not expressing an opinion about them —
they document Google’s data handling practices and the fact that Google has refused to respond to anything for months.
If Google had a legally defensible explanation for why they store deleted data,
they would have written it long ago.
They didn’t.
Because they don’t have one.
And now we are at the point where:
Google is silent,
NOYB is investigating,
the evidence is public,
and Google can no longer pretend the issue doesn’t exist.
This is no longer forum drama.
This is no longer “a user complaining.”
This is a documented, ongoing data‑protection issue under investigation — one that Google cannot sweep under the rug.
And I will absolutely take legal action against Google.
Not “maybe,” not “we’ll see,” not “if things go that way.”
I will sue them — and I will keep every piece of evidence.
I directly contacted Guillaume Vernade, one of Google’s lead developers and a public‑facing representative of Google’s AI products. He is not an anonymous forum user — he is a Google employee and one of the main developers associated with this platform.
He has not replied to any of my messages. Not a single word. And this silence is fully archived.
I saved:
the private messages sent to him,
the timestamps,
the delivery confirmations,
the HTML snapshots,
the Wayback Machine captures,
the archive.ph captures.
All of these prove that he received my messages and chose not to respond. This is part of Google’s pattern: they have not replied to any official inquiry, DPO request, or legal question for months.
You completely missed the point of my post. It’s not about how Drive’s trash bin works or its mechanics—I don’t care about that.
The core of my evidence is this: the fact that restoring a simple JSON file from Drive immediately brings back the entire chat and prompt without a single error proves beyond a doubt that no deletion command was ever executed on the backend server side.
Go ahead and report my post—oh wait, you already did, because you clearly lack even basic logic, so running to hit the report button is just your natural reflex.
