Okay, I am not a lawyer so I only understood about half of what just happened. But I am fairly sure, given the context, that Elon Musk’s lawyers may have just fucked up big.
Technology
Remove your personal info from the web; stop it from coming back
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
The first time I tried to remove my personal information from people search sites, it was back online after a few weeks. If the same thing happened to you, you might have decided it’s just not worth the effort. This is likely by design.
Data brokers profit from your information, so they’re incentivized to make the process as difficult as possible. Sen. Maggie Hassan even called out a few data brokers recently for hiding their opt-out pages altogether. But you don’t have to let them keep your data, as long as you know what to do.
Sign up for my FREE CyberGuy Report
- Get my best tech tips, urgent security alerts and exclusive deals delivered straight to your inbox.
- For simple, real-world ways to spot scams early and stay protected, visit CyberGuy.com trusted by millions who watch CyberGuy on TV daily.
- Plus, you’ll get instant access to my Ultimate Scam Survival Guide free when you join.
SPRING CLEAN YOUR DIGITAL FOOTPRINT: WHY RETIREES ARE SCAM TARGETS
A quick search of your name can reveal just how many sites are sharing your personal information without you realizing it. (Kurt “CyberGuy” Knutsson)
How to remove your personal info
The way I see it, there are two ways you can do this:
- Manually removing your information
- Using an automated data removal service
I recommend the second option. It saves a lot of time and does a more thorough job than most people will manage on their own. But if you still prefer to go about it yourself, I’ll share a step-by-step guide to help you do it as painlessly and thoroughly as possible.
Step 1: map your exposures
This step is important for when your information inevitably reappears after some time. Before you start removing anything, compile a list of places where your personal information appears or is likely to be held. Or you can compile the list yourself. The sites will likely include:
People search sites
These are the easiest to find because they’re designed to be public.
- Search: “your full name” + city, “your phone number”, “your email”
- Check beyond page 1, as many listings appear deeper in the results
- Repeat searches with: Maiden names or name variations and old locations
Private data broker databases (harder to see, but widely used)
These don’t usually show up in search results because they sell data to businesses, not individuals. You can try to infer their presence based on how your data is used, but it’s no easy feat.
This is one of the reasons I recommend using a data removal service. They narrow down which brokers are most likely to have your information based on things like your location and other markers.
But if you want to try for yourself, look for signals like:
- Getting calls or emails from companies you’ve never interacted with
- Highly specific outreach (e.g., your job title, income range, or recent move)
- Pre-filled forms with your personal details
Where your data likely came from:
- Warranty registrations
- Loyalty programs and retail purchases
- Financial, insurance, or real estate inquiries
- App usage and location data
If you’ve shared your data with a company, there’s a strong chance it’s been resold or shared with brokers behind the scenes.
Marketing and lead generation lists
These are often built for targeted advertising and outreach, and your data can circulate across many of them at once.
How to spot them:
Sudden spikes in spam after:
Signing up for a service
Entering a giveaway or quiz
Downloading a resource (e.g., ebook, discount code)
- Signing up for a service
- Entering a giveaway or quiz
- Downloading a resource (e.g., ebook, discount code)
- Emails that feel “personalized” but come from unfamiliar brands
- Messages referencing a specific interest, purchase, or life event
Where to check:
- Your email inbox (search for patterns in senders)
- SMS history for unknown marketing messages
- Unsubscribe pages (they often reveal the company or list owner)
Important: Unsubscribing usually stops messages. It doesn’t remove your data from the underlying list.
Public profile aggregators (not quite the same as people-search sites)
These sites compile information from across the web but aren’t always designed specifically for “people lookup.”
Examples include:
- Old forum profiles or community pages
- Professional directories and membership listings
- Scraped social media profiles
- Event attendee lists or speaker bios
How to find them:
Search your name in quotes + keywords like:
“profile”, “bio”, “member”, “directory”
- “profile”, “bio”, “member”, “directory”
- Search usernames you’ve used in the past
- Use image search to find reused profile photos
These are often overlooked but can still expose valuable details like your location, employer, or social links.
5 MYTHS ABOUT IDENTITY THEFT THAT PUT YOUR DATA AT RISK
Data broker listings often include sensitive details like your address, phone number and relatives, making removal a critical first step. (Kurt “CyberGuy” Knutsson)
Step 2: Remove your data
Now that you’ve mapped where your data is exposed (or likely to be), it’s time to start removing it. Instead of jumping randomly between sites, work through your list in order of visibility and risk:
- People search sites (highest visibility)
- Public profile aggregators
- Marketing and lead-gen lists
- Private data brokers (least visible, but still important)
Remove your data from people-search sites
These should be your first priority because they make your personal information easy for anyone to find.
Typical process:
- Find your listing using the link you saved earlier
- Locate the “opt-out” or “remove my info” page (usually in the footer)
- Submit your profile URL
- Verify your request (via email or CAPTCHA)
What to expect:
- Time per site: ~5-20 minutes
- Removal timeframe: a few days to a couple of weeks
Tip: Save confirmation emails or screenshots. You may need them if your data reappears.
Remove your data from public profile aggregators
These can be less standardized, since they’re often scraped or republished pages.
Typical process:
- Look for a “Contact,” “Support,” or “Privacy” page
- Request removal directly (or delete your account, if possible)
- If no response, identify the site owner via WHOIS or hosting info
Alternative option:
- If the page won’t be removed, you can request de-indexing through Google, but this only hides it from search results, not the site itself
These take more effort, but they’re worth addressing because they often contain contextual details (job, interests, affiliations.)
Remove your data from marketing and lead-generation lists
This is less about a single listing and more about stopping ongoing data use.
Typical process:
- Use the “unsubscribe” link in emails or reply STOP to SMS messages
- Look for a “delete my data” or privacy request option
- Submit a formal request if available (often under GDPR/CCPA rights)
Important:
- Unsubscribing stops messages
- It does not always delete your data
If the company has a privacy page, look specifically for:
- “Right to deletion”
- “Do not sell my information”
Remove your data from private data broker databases
These are the least visible and often the most frustrating to deal with manually.
Typical process:
- Find the company’s privacy or legal page
- Submit a data access or deletion request
- Verify your identity (this may require ID documents)
What makes this harder:
- You often don’t know which brokers have your data
- Some require detailed verification
- Responses can take weeks
This is where most people hit a wall and where ongoing monitoring or automation becomes useful.
Keep track as you go
As you work through your list, track:
- Sites you’ve submitted requests to
- Dates of submission
- Confirmation emails or case IDs
This makes it much easier to:
- Follow up if needed
- Re-check later when your data reappears
1 BILLION IDENTITY RECORDS EXPOSED IN ID VERIFICATION DATA LEAK
Even after you remove your information, it can reappear, which is why ongoing monitoring or automated removal matters. (Kurt “CyberGuy” Knutsson)
The best way to deal with resurfacing data
My recommendation is to use a personal data removal service. These services handle the entire removal process for you, so there’s no need to search for your own data online or return to data broker sites to repeat opt-out requests. Everything is managed in the background.
They also tend to do a more thorough job than most people can manage on their own.
Many data removal services can request deletions from a wide range of websites, including some that are not easy to find on your own. They also scan for new exposures, alert you if your information shows up again and allow you to submit additional removal requests when needed. In some cases, these requests are handled by privacy specialists.
Most services also include a 30-day money-back guarantee, so you can try it risk-free and see how much of your information is exposed online.
YOU COULD BE SHARING YOUR SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER WHEN YOU DON’T NEED TO
Check out my top picks for data removal services and get a free scan to find out if your personal information is already out on the web by visiting Cyberguy.com.
Get a free scan to find out if your personal information is already out on the web: Cyberguy.com.
Kurt’s key takeaways
Removing your personal information from the internet is not a one-and-done task. It takes persistence, a bit of strategy and the right tools. The frustrating part is that your data can come back even after you remove it, but that does not mean the effort is wasted. Every step you take reduces your exposure and makes it harder for your information to spread. If you want the most control, doing it manually gives you a clear view of where your data lives. However, if you want consistency without the ongoing time commitment, a data removal service can take that burden off your plate and keep working in the background. Either way, the key is to stay proactive. Your data has value, and once you start treating it that way, you will approach your privacy very differently.
Have you ever removed your personal info online only to see it show up again later, and what did you do next? Let us know by writing to us at Cyberguy.com.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Sign up for my FREE CyberGuy Report
- Get my best tech tips, urgent security alerts and exclusive deals delivered straight to your inbox.
- For simple, real-world ways to spot scams early and stay protected, visit CyberGuy.com trusted by millions who watch CyberGuy on TV daily.
- Plus, you’ll get instant access to my Ultimate Scam Survival Guide free when you join.
Copyright 2026 CyberGuy.com. All rights reserved.
Technology
Aurzen’s tiny trifold projector is almost 40 percent off right now
Not all trifolds are created equal — just ask our own Allison Johnson, who recently spent time with Samsung’s ill-fated Galaxy phone. Aurzen’s Zip projector is the kind of trifold gadget we can fully get behind, though, and it’s currently on sale at Amazon for $259.99 ($140 off). You can also pick it up in several colors directly from Aurzen for the same price, or in the gold shade for a new low of $249.99.
While not nearly as powerful as Anker’s Nebula P1 and other portable projectors we’ve recently tested, the Zip is surprisingly capable despite its small stature and battery-powered operation. The snake-like 720p projector offers up to 100 lumens of brightness — meaning it will work best in dark environments, or in brighter rooms when viewing a smaller image — while its built-in battery should last about 80 minutes based on our real-world testing. That’s not exactly marathon battery life, but it’s easy enough to top off the Zip using a power bank or wall adapter.
In terms of support, the Zip can quickly connect to iPhones via AirPlay and to Android devices over Miracast, Smart View, and similar standards, allowing you to wirelessly mirror everything you can see on your phone. You can use it to watch any movies you’ve downloaded on your device, peruse your social feeds, or get in a quick session with your favorite game. It works in both landscape and portrait orientations, too, and supports Bluetooth, letting you listen privately with headphones or pair it to your favorite speaker.
The biggest downside to the Zip, at least for some folks, is that you won’t be able to use it to watch content from services like Netflix, Hulu, and HBO Max due to copyright restrictions. Aurzen does make a USB-C dongle that allows you to stream DRM-protected content, if you truly can’t get by without watching the latest episode of Euphoria. You’ll have to pay a whopping $109 for the privilege, or find another way.
Technology
Fox News AI Newsletter: The AI model that’s too dangerous to go public
Pages from the Anthropic website and the company’s logos are displayed on a computer screen in New York on Feb. 26, 2026. (Patrick Sison/AP Photo)
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Welcome to Fox News’ Artificial Intelligence newsletter with the latest AI technology advancements.
IN TODAY’S NEWSLETTER:
– Anthropic has an AI model that’s too dangerous to go public
– Melania Trump turns White House tennis pavilion into AI lab for students
– Florida murder suspect asked ChatGPT about dumping human remains days before killings: docs
LOCKS WIDE OPEN: Anthropic’s Mythos AI model, too dangerous to release publicly, is changing digital security faster than anyone is ready for – There is a new AI model called Mythos. Anthropic built it for defensive cybersecurity research. It is so effective at finding software vulnerabilities that Anthropic decided the general public cannot have it.
FUNDAMENTAL SHIFT: From rogue AI blackmailing humans to condensing school days, AI revolution already reshaping life – Fox Business explores how the artificial intelligence revolution is already fundamentally reshaping everyday life, ranging from alarming scenarios of rogue AI blackmailing humans to innovative applications condensing traditional school days.
DIVERSITY FIGHT: Trump DOJ jumps into Musk xAI court battle – The Trump Department of Justice has formally intervened in a high-profile court battle involving Elon Musk’s artificial intelligence company xAI, as a broader legal and political fight over corporate diversity initiatives rapidly heats up.
FIRST LADY FUTURE: Melania Trump embraces AI education initiative in White House tech push she’s been championing – First lady Melania Trump is actively embracing a new artificial intelligence education initiative as part of a broader White House technology push that she has long been championing.
Melania Trump an immersive event AI event this week where students used Meta virtual reality headsets and AI-powered glasses to explore British landmarks and examine historical artifacts. (Andrea Hanks)
PRICE PAIN SPREADS: AI boom tests GOP’s midterm affordability pitch – The rapid artificial intelligence boom and its associated energy costs are beginning to test the Republican Party’s midterm pitch on affordability as economic price pain spreads among voters.
CHILLING QUERY: Florida murder suspect asked ChatGPT about dumping human remains days before killings: docs – Newly released court documents revealing that a Florida murder suspect allegedly asked the artificial intelligence program ChatGPT for advice on dumping human remains just days before the killings occurred.
RACE IS ON: Kevin O’Leary details massive Utah AI data center to rival China’s tech dominance – Business mogul Kevin O’Leary detailed plans for a massive artificial intelligence data center in Utah designed specifically to rival China’s growing global tech dominance.
TECH FIGHT: Former Apple CEO sees OpenAI poses largest competitive threat to tech giant in years – Former Apple CEO John Sculley is sounding the alarm on artificial intelligence, warning that OpenAI currently poses the largest competitive threat the massive tech giant has faced in years.
BOUNCING BACK: US economic growth rebounds as AI buildout and consumer spending fuel first quarter – U.S. economic growth rebounded in the first quarter of the year from a sluggish fourth quarter, according to the Commerce Department’s latest estimate.
JOB IMPACT: Zuckerberg says Meta layoffs tied to AI spending, won’t rule out future cuts – Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg has explicitly tied recent staff layoffs to the company’s massive spending on artificial intelligence, while pointedly refusing to rule out the possibility of future workforce cuts.
HEAVYWEIGHT LEGAL BATTLE: Elon Musk tells court he was fool for funding OpenAI: report – Tech billionaire Elon Musk told a court that he was a “fool” for his early financial role in funding the artificial intelligence research organization OpenAI.
Elon Musk testifies during the OpenAI trial in Oakland, Calif., on April 29, 2026. (Vicki Behringer)
LEARNING ON THE JOB: Meta tracks workers to train AI agents – Social media giant Meta is actively tracking its own workers and analyzing their internal communications in an effort to train its advanced new artificial intelligence agents.
Subscribe now to get the Fox News Artificial Intelligence Newsletter in your inbox.
FOLLOW FOX NEWS ON SOCIAL MEDIA
YouTube
X
SIGN UP FOR OUR OTHER NEWSLETTERS
Fox News First
Fox News Opinion
Fox News Lifestyle
Fox News Health
DOWNLOAD OUR APPS
Fox News
Fox Business
Fox Weather
Fox Sports
Tubi
WATCH FOX NEWS ONLINE
Fox News Go
STREAM FOX NATION
Fox Nation
Stay up to date on the latest AI technology advancements and learn about the challenges and opportunities AI presents now and for the future with Fox News here.
Technology
The craziest part of Musk v. Altman happened while the jury was out of the room
Jared “James Brickhouse” Birchall, Musk’s finance guy and all-around fixer, took the stand after Musk today. Most of his testimony was dull and seemed to exist primarily to get some documents read into the record, which sucks but is a normal part of sitting through trials. But at the very end of his boring testimony something interesting happened. I believe we all got a surprise, something that rarely happens in courtrooms.
The lawyer conducting his direct examination was passed a note by another member of the team, and asked Birchall what was apparently contained on the note: was he familiar with the xAI bid for OpenAI’s assets?
“Sam Altman was on both sides of the table.”
“As I recall, a lawyer we were working with had asked the attorney general of California to ensure that in their fiduciary duty, proper value was being given to the assets of the nonprofit of OpenAI,” Birchall said. In his understanding, there was a negotiation “between Sam Altman and himself on both sides of the table, the for-profit and the non-profit, attempting to discount the value of the non-profit assets. And we made that bid in an attempt to properly account for the value the foundation had, and create a market bid that would need to be considered by the attorney general.”
Here’s some lore: in February 2025, a Musk-led coalition made a $97.4 billion bid for the non-profit that controls OpenAI. The bid was submitted by Marc Toberoff, one of Musk’s lawyers in the current case. This bid happened as OpenAI was restructuring itself so that the for-profit arm could be cleared to go public. In Birchall’s testimony, that bid was made because Musk, Birchall, and others, thought Altman might undervalue the nonprofit as the company restructured itself. (I’m not really sure why that would be a problem for Musk and xAI, frankly, but whatever.)
The defense counsel objected, and Birchall’s rant was struck for lack of foundation. So we did this piece by piece to establish the foundation, ending with Birchall saying, again, “Sam Altman was on both sides of the table.”
On cross-examination, Bradley Wilson from Wachtell Lipton — OpenAI’s lawyers — picked the thread back up. Wilson asked how much of this Birchall had learned from sources other than lawyers. Birchall said he’d have a hard time being able to untangle that. After a few more exchanges, Wilson moved to strike all of Birchall’s testimony about the xAI bid on grounds that would not be discussed in front of the jury.
“You must have been very convincing. You’re not very convincing today.”
The jury got to leave early while the lawyers duked it out, and this is where it got weird. Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers started asking Birchall questions herself, and it clearly was making Birchall nervous. Birchall said he doesn’t remember discussing the xAI bid with Musk or Shivon Zilis or any other principal of the Musk organization. It sure sounded like Musk’s lawyers hadn’t given OpenAI proper discovery on this topic in the depositions, and so we were doing a fast and dirty deposition with the judge right then. At one point, Gonzalez Rogers told the plaintiff’s counsel to quit coaching the witness.
Birchall said he’d spoken to the other members of the consortium about the bid, but that he wasn’t involved in discussions with Musk about when to send the bid letter. He claimed he’d heard some things from Toberoff, but that he wasn’t aware that Toberoff represented some of the other bidders. He didn’t know if xAI was aware that Toberoff represented some of the other bidders, either.
Birchall didn’t know whether other investors had first-hand information about OpenAI, he claimed. No one had documents from inside OpenAI as far as he knew. Gonzalez Rogers remained unconvinced. “I’m still struggling with how you can have conversations with these individuals to raise $97.5 billion but have no recollections even in a general sense,” she said. Birchall said he had a general sense — he called each of the people involved to see if they were interested in joining Musk on the bid.
“Why would they do that?” Gonzales Rogers asked. Birchall said these were people with whom Musk et al had longstanding relationships. “You must have been very convincing,” she said. “You’re not very convincing today.”
Birchall said there were no numbers besides the topline one floated when he called prospective investors, and that after speaking with him, they were passed off to lawyers. He didn’t remember who chose the $97.4 billion number, and said he got it from the legal team, telling Gonzalez Rogers he didn’t get it from Musk. Gonzalez Rogers asked if that analysis was created by anyone besides Toberoff. Birchall said not that he could recall.
“Did a lawyer tell you this was part of litigation?” Gonzalez Rogers asked.
No, Birchall said. It was strictly a business deal.
Apparently Steven Molo, who’d been defending Musk during the deposition, had made multiple objections to questions about the deal, citing privileged communications. Business deals, apparently, aren’t privileged. But all discovery into the xAI bid for OpenAI had been blocked before the trial began. Unfortunately, by asking Birchall about the xAI deal at the very end of the direct examination, Musk’s team may have opened the door for more digging into it. You may be wondering, “open the door to what” and your guess is as good as mine. More discovery? Maybe something about anticompetitive behavior from Musk? It doesn’t sound like it’s going to be good for Musk, I can tell you that much.
Gonzalez Rogers then asked who’d passed the note, and all the lawyers just sat there like guilty children. Finally, the guy responsible said he’d passed it, but he didn’t write it; a junior lawyer did. Who wrote it? More silence. Finally Toberoff — hardly a junior lawyer — stood up and took responsibility. Why had he done it? “I thought it was appropriate.”
“Sounds like you wanted to open the door, then,” Gonzalez Rogers said. We adjourned while she said she’d consider what to do with this testimony. She will probably rule on it tomorrow.
Correction, April 30th: It is Shivon Zilis, not Sharon Zilis.
-
News9 minutes agoCourt restricts abortion access across the US by blocking the mailing of mifepristone
-
New York2 hours ago9-Year-Old Hit and Killed by School Bus in Brooklyn
-
Detroit, MI2 hours agoWhere to watch Detroit Pistons vs. Orlando Magic Game 6 NBA playoffs: Live stream, start time, TV channel, odds for Friday, May 1
-
San Francisco, CA2 hours agoChonkers the Gigantic Steller Sea Lion Draws Crowds to Pier 39
-
Dallas, TX2 hours agoDallas firefighter injured in early‑morning house fire expected to recover
-
Miami, FL3 hours agoMax Verstappen: Red Bull Miami updates have “almost halved” gap to F1 frontrunners
-
Boston, MA3 hours ago
Jazzy Francik tosses no-hitter as FSU softball run-rules Boston College
-
Denver, CO3 hours agoHundreds targeted by Denver text scam show up for fake court hearing