In his recent The Hill opinion, Bryan Rotella addresses a rapidly emerging and little-understood risk in the adoption of generative AI: your conversations with artificial intelligence aren’t truly private. As AI tools like ChatGPT become part of everyday life — from personal chats to sensitive decision support — the assumption that these interactions remain confidential is increasingly undercut by legal realities, corporate data practices, and evolving case law.

Rotella explains that AI platforms feel private and conversational, often mimicking the tone and candor of human dialogue. Yet, unlike conversations with licensed professionals or encrypted messaging services, these chats lack inherent confidentiality protections and can be subject to disclosure in legal proceedings or regulatory inquiries. Users may be unwittingly creating a permanent digital record that can be compelled in discovery, subpoenaed by opposing parties, or accessed by third parties under existing terms of service.

This disconnect between how AI feels and how it functions poses a serious risk for individuals and organizations alike. Without robust transparency, clear ethical boundaries, and legal frameworks that treat AI interactions with the same standards of privacy as human professionals, users could face unintended consequences — from reputational harm to legal exposure. Rotella’s argument underscores the urgent need to rethink assumptions about AI privacy and build guardrails that align with user expectations and real-world protections.