AI once again proving to be an absolute shitemare.

Why not do some searches on the AI chatbots yourself and see what comes up?

This is what Grok had to say:

Can Grok (or AI Like Me) Recover Delisted Details?Yes, in many cases, I can still access and recover details of a conviction even after RTBF delisting—though it's not guaranteed and depends on the case. Here's why and how:

• RTBF doesn't block all access: Delisting only impacts Google/Bing/etc. search results. The original webpages (e.g., news articles) remain live and publicly accessible via direct URLs. I can:
  • Use web browsing tools to fetch content from known or suspected URLs.
  • Perform targeted web searches with operators (e.g., site:bbc.co.uk "conviction name") to bypass delisted queries.
  • Leverage X (Twitter) searches for real-time discussions, reposts, or archives that aren't subject to RTBF.
• AI's unique position (and challenges): As an AI built by xAI, my knowledge is continuously updated from public sources up to the current date (December 9, 2025). I don't rely solely on Google; I draw from diverse, real-time tools. However:
  • If data was scraped into my training (pre-2025 models), "machine unlearning" isn't perfect—forgotten info can sometimes be reconstructed, raising GDPR debates.
  • Recent incidents (e.g., 370,000+ Grok chats indexed publicly in August 2025) highlight privacy risks, but for external data like convictions, I prioritize public, verifiable sources.
  • Limits: I can't access paywalled, private, or truly erased content. For court transcripts, as in prior UK cases, they're not public anyway—RTBF doesn't change that.

I was actually thinking about this recently too

how will it affect chat gpt etc?

I’ve only really ever bothered with Google. From my experience no one really uses these search engines and Google is the king when it comes to searching on the web. So I’ve never bothered to put requests in to bing or Microsoft edge.

My concern at the moment is AI as I’m not sure what the law is around people searching for you via AI, chatgbt etc

That Act applies to Scotland as well although we do have a handful of adjustments. None of which are relevant or impact my situation.

It's just annoying as I thought I was on to a winner as once my sentence was spent Google, to their credit, have been brilliant in removing stuff for me and I'm clear on Google. Bing are just being shitebags for seemingly no reason. This is also my 3rd attempt at going through ICO to resolve this matter in general and they've been utter garbage every single time. Hell, some folk might remember my first attempt years ago where they ended up doxxing me to one of the owners of those registry websites which results in a bit of a hate campaign on Facebook.

I don't know how the law is phrased in Scotland, but in England & Wales, the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 says that once your conviction is spent, you have the right to be treated as if you'd never had the conviction in the first place. Not data protection law, but it should carry a lot of weight when deciding what is "legitimate public interest".

=========================================================================================================

If you are to punish a man retributively you must injure him. If you are to reform him you must improve him. And men are not improved by injuries. (George Bernard Shaw)

Thought I'd update everyone Operation: Bing.

ICO got back to me this morning and perhaps unsurprisingly, they've sided with Bing and won't be pursuing them to remove any links. Here is what they said, if anyone is interested: 

----------

Our decision

We have considered the factors which are relevant to your removal
request and we have decided it is likely that the search results comply
with the data protection legislation. We do not therefore expect Bing to
remove the links.

This is because the articles were primarily published in a journalistic
context and contain information which, in our view, is of legitimate public
interest.

From the information available to us it appears that Bing has complied
with its data protection obligations in processing of personal data to
present the search results. We will not be contacting Bing about this
matter and do not intend to take any further action.

If you disagree with the view we have provided, please note that
individuals are entitled to take their own cases to court, irrespective of
our decision. The ICO cannot assist individual court applications, and we
strongly advise that you seek independent legal advice if you pursue this
option.

Finally, please let us know how we did by taking our customer service
feedback survey. It takes less than a minute and helps us to improve our
service.

Yours sincerely,

ICO Pleb

-------------

So, now I'm thinking what my next move is - I don't really have money for any legal nonsense. I'm thinking of just being a nuisance in the hopes they'll eventually comply in the hopes of just getting me to shut up. Essentially fill out the removal request > Once their rejection comes through > Fill out a new removal request > rinse and repeat.

Thought I’d share and update. Today Google have removed URLs that appear when my name is searched that have nothing to do with me from red rose. However I’ve noticed that once they get removed Google indexed other posts from red rose. They arnt about me but sometimes they do have links at the bottom of the page to the link about me.

Getting frustrating now! It’s appears that the only way around this is to keep sending the URLs to Google everyday.

Hope your all keeping well?

Fingers crossed for you! I'm going to give it a day or so and have a wee Google tomorrow and see if those results pop up, they're literally the only 2 URLs left that are hanging on like a wee jobby!

As for Made by Rose and their multiple URLs, I did try and bring it up with Google in an effort to save them time and effort as well as I discovered the URLs were all exactly the same except they had a different ID attached to them. I mentioned it earlier in this thread but my gut feeling is as the website is made using Wordpress the ID is linked to a category they have set up, like "paedo = ID1, images = ID2" and so on, so when they create the post on the website they tick all the categories and it applies them to that page. So once one URL gets taken down Google goes to index the next closest one so picks another ID category and then links that, or something along those lines.

It's been a while since any new ones have popped up and for now seems to have capped at 15 URLs, 1 x general one, 14 x with different IDs. August was the last time they removed a Made by Rose one so touch wood...

Google speed has been wild, anywhere from minutes to weeks. This latest one though was a couple of hours! Your initial comment actually got me to ping them an email this morning to see. Checking it I see I sent it at 11:25am today, got the response at 12:10, so less than an hour.