Perplexity's "Incognito Mode" is a "sham," lawsuit says
Google, Meta, and Perplexity accused of sharing millions of chats to increase ad revenue.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2026/04/perplexitys-incognito-mode-is-a-sham-lawsuit-says/?utm_brand=arstechnica&utm_social-type=owned&utm_source=mastodon&utm_medium=social
@arstechnica shocked Pikachu face
@arstechnica
Not surprised.
@ilust606 @arstechnica it's just like when you go into Google settings to say no history whatsoever. Then you go to YouTube which displays "we are sorry to show you a blank page but you chose 'no history'" and then when you watch a video and see the suggestions below: surprise, it has nothing to do with the video you are currently watching ... But is perfectly related to what you watched a week before. Pure coincidence I guess.
@arstechnica Any modern company = YOU ARE THE PRODUCT. Don't think otherwise for any company up to and including Apple.
@[email protected]

surprised?

didn't think so.

@arstechnica "Disturbingly, the lawsuit alleged, chats are also shared with personally identifiable information (PII), even when users who want to stay anonymous opt to use Perplexity’s “Incognito Mode.” That mode, the lawsuit charged, is a “sham.”

“‘Incognito’ mode does nothing to protect users from having their conversations shared with Meta and Google,” the complaint said. “Even paid users who turned on the ‘Incognito’ feature still had their conversations shared with Meta and Google, along with their email addresses and other identifiers that allowed Meta and Google to personally identify them.”"

---

To be fair, I think this comes from the fundamental misunderstanding that 'Incognito mode' is at all anonymous. Browsers' incognito mode is not anonymous, nor does it protect your privacy. It just doesn't save the pages you access to your browser's history, nor does it save the logins.

Perplexity directly points that out in the app, it just doesn't save the chats to your library.