LinkedIn is sharing your data with AI — unless you tell it not to

by Alison Green on September 25, 2024

LinkedIn has a new practice of sharing your personal data to train AI — unless you specifically opt out. That includes your profile, your posts, and your videos.

Without announcing it, LinkedIn apparently added a new data privacy setting last week that covers this, and they turned it on for everyone.

If you want to opt out, here’s how:

In your LinkedIn account, open “Settings & Privacy.” Select “Data privacy” and turn off the option under “Data for generative AI improvement.”

Be aware that turning this off will be not retroactive. LinkedIn has already begun training its AI with your content, and there’s no way to undo whatever they’ve already used.

You may also like:
{ 179 comments }

{ 179 comments… read them below }

    4. Insert Clever Name Here*

      Same! I haven’t logged into Linkedin in 9 years but I still went in and turned it off!

      1. Nicosloanica*

        Surprised they didn’t make you add “more secure” 2-factor settings so they could add and then scrape your phone number and other account info, TBH.

    5. Leslie*

      Thanks! I updated a lot of the options. My feed will be boring, but I’m tired of all of the irrelevant ads.

    7. Elizabeth the Ginger*

      I logged in to turn it off and then used the customer support form to write a letter of complaint.

    1. CrunchyTech*

      I share these yucky feelings. I wish deactivating LinkedIn as a job seeker was as easy as my decision to tell Facebook to eat dirt.

    1. postdooc*

      I love that companies are so happy to advertise all their ‘AI features’ (with a heavy eye roll), but start sharing your data immediately without any notification… almost as if people wouldn’t have consented otherwise…

      1. ampersand*

        Right?! There are a handful of good uses for AI and instead companies have latched on to using it in ways that almost universally upsets the general public. Yay technology.

    1. NotSocial*

      I’m with you. I just deactivated all my social media, including LinkedIn, a few weeks ago and life is already better.

      1. And...uh...Abraham Lincoln*

        I logged in, turned it off, thought about it for a minute, and then closed my account. I don’t really use it anyway, and setting all accounts to on without so much as a notice is incredibly bad business. I’m done.

  9. Purple Cat*

    Wow. Thanks for the update!
    I also turned off the “social, economic, and workplace research” option. Felt unnecessary.

    2. Just Another Cog*

      Same! Thinking hard about just closing the account altogether. I feel like a chump giving this info “away” for free.

    1. Just Another Cog*

      I just went back and did all these things, too! Still thinking hard about just closing the account. :/

  12. IncessantOwlbears*

    Ugh, that’s so gross of them to do that without prior warning! At what point does this become actionable? Is this legal in Europe?

    1. Oxford Common Sense*

      I *think* it’s illegal in Europe, but I’m not certain. I’m not a lawyer in Europe or elsewhere.

      2. The wall of creativity*

        They did set it up in the UK and some users switched it off. But now LinkedIn have been warned off by some data regulator and turned it off for all UK users. Best keep an eye open, though, in case they reopen it without telling anybody,

    2. English Rose*

      Based in UK and don’t have this option. Maybe not rolled out here yet, maybe not legal. Will keep an eye on it.

      1. Can't remember my username*

        Also based in the UK and don’t the the option yet. Hoping it doesn’t arrive here.

    4. The Flying Dutchman*

      The GDPR (AIUI, as a brand sparkly new formal resident of the EU) requires opt-in for data sharing, so yeah, they can’t Just Do That, and I think they know it – I don’t have the option either.

    7. Mephyle*

      I shared this with my freelance colleagues and the ones in Europe said they didn’t see this option. This would be because of the GDPR. So they don’t have to be concerned about it – for now.

  13. Pterodactyls are under-cited in the psychological literature*

    But AI usage doesn’t need to be regulated because companies will police themselves-

    Hate this. Want strong data privacy and AI legislation!

    2. Paint N Drip*

      Literally why would anyone think that, my god – they have no impetus to police themselves, and they DO have a reason to NOT police themselves

    3. fhqwhgads*

      This isn’t really an AI issue even though that’s what they’re using the data for. It’s still just a plain old data privacy issue.
      I’m sort of surprised they managed to roll it out this way, even with it off in the EU. My understanding of GDPR is it applies to anyone in the EU regardless of citizenship and any EU citizen regardless of location. So they may have violated GDPR anyway.

      1. kicking-k*

        The first part sounds correct to me (I am a data protection specialist). I’m not so sure it applies to any EU citizen regardless of location… I will look into that!

  15. Helvetica*

    FYI, it is not there for European Economic Area, Switzerland and UK users due to existing data privacy laws.

      2. Sharpie*

        Have you got any location data settings set up to show you not in Europe?

        (I’m not on LinkedIn now and I sure as hell won’t be after this, either.)

    2. The Prettiest Curse*

      I am in the UK and don’t see that option, so maybe it only applies to some users.
      I created my LinkedIn account while I was living in the US, so you think that would make it more likely that I’d have the default opt-in.

  16. Wanderland*

    THANK YOU! I just turned it off. I’m over AI being embedded into all these apps and sites. This is a reminder to check everything.

  17. High Score!*

    Ugh! Opt out should be illegal. Things like that need to be opt in. So sketch! Our laws need to catch up with technology. US doesn’t even have any “right to be forgotten” or “retract consent” laws like European countries do.

    1. Kyrielle*

      THIS. Or at the very least give public open warning and *don’t turn the feature on for a couple weeks* until anyone who wants to opt out has a chance to do so, but frankly, that’s not good enough for things like this, I don’t think.

    2. Dawn*

      The EU is so far ahead of everyone else on this. When I visit Canadian-only websites, I don’t get the option to turn off cookies. I do get that option everywhere else, because of EU data privacy laws, but for sites like those owned by Loblaw’s (our major and very wealthy and very shady grocery etc retail owner) I don’t get that option at all, just “we use cookies and by visiting our website you consent.”

      These days I do use an extension called Ghostery to nab all the cookies that consent settings don’t get, but it’s so ridiculous that we have to go to such extreme lengths to maintain our basic privacy and not have our information sold.

  18. Person from the Resume*

    Thanks for this info. I barely use LinkedIn, but it has a fairly out of date profile for me. I will login and opt out.

  19. juliebulie*

    Very sneaky. And the option to turn it off isn’t easy to find if you don’t know exactly where to look. -1000 points, linkedin.

  21. Gatomon*

    I’m beginning to think LinkedIn is a mistake. I actually haven’t got an account. But Teams periodically tries to link me to a LinkedIn account. There’s someone (who is obviously not me) on LinkedIn with the same name. Teams keeps asking me to confirm and link my work account with this person’s LinkedIn. The name of this person’s company is mildly inappropriate, though it’s a legitimate business. :( It claims I’m the only one who can see this, but I don’t believe them.

    2. Judge Judy and Executioner*

      If you have a job at aren’t looking for a new one, LinkedIn is really only useful for networking. If you are looking for a job, LinkedIn is one of the best places to be for corporate roles in the US. My last 2 employers recruited me through LinkedIn direct messages, and a previous manager barely used their account but was also recruited through the platform. When I was laid off, LinkedIn was how I communicated with my network that I was out of a job and needed a new one. I was much more successful job hunting when I was referred than through places I found on my own.

      1. Econobiker*

        Echo this as a good function for LinkedIn. The downside to LinkedIn is now people post political and religious items as if LinkedIn was Facebook because LinkedIn allows more postings than in the past.
        oh that and the “pig butchering” scams that abound on LinkedIn too which are con scams to extract money from westerners either through fake investment opportunities or romance scams.

  23. Stuart Foote*

    I know some people think that AI is going to be taking all our jobs and changing the world, but I can’t remember a more useless innovation that absolutely no one likes using (aside from playing with ChatGPT, cheating on school assignments, and generating crappy images). Google’s AI results? Terrible. Any AI chatbot you get when trying to deal with getting something sorted out with a company? Awful experience. All those AI pictures sketchy Twitter accounts use? All horrible pictures. (I do understand that AI can help with coding and probably some other things, but 90% of the applications are pretty useless).

    Remember that one Super Bowl that was all crypto ads? And then how so many tech companies pivoted to the “metaverse” after that? If the AI bubble bursts that will be three sizable tech bubbles in a row, all while the core functions of these tech companies (search, social networking, shopping) decay more and more.

    1. FrivYeti*

      Yep. Part of the reason that AI is so aggressive right now is that they have no use cases and no functionality and no way to be profitable, and if the bubble bursts here it’s going to take a lot of companies down with it because they thought they had a miracle money-printing machine.

      The real threat is that so many big companies are so obsessed with AI “savings” that they will forge ahead anyway, replacing everyone’s jobs with much harder, lower-paying jobs fixing AI output, and providing substantially worse services but with no alternatives available because they’ve roped too many people into the scam.

    2. call me wheels*

      Someone recommended me Ed Zitron’s blog series of articles on the AI bubble and why it all happens and things like that. I don’t have a great deal of knowledge about this stuff but it seemed well informed and reasonable and I found it very interesting and informative, so I would probably recommend also if anyone is interested.

    3. Ganymede II*

      There’s no way anyone will want to pay the actual real cost of AI when they start getting handed the electricity bill that comes with it.
      Right now they’re in the “move fast and break things” phase, but what they’re breaking is the electrical grid and pumping up rivers and water tables. It’s ridiculous.

      1. Trixie Belden was my hero*

        I saw an article this week that they are reopening Three Mile Island to sell electricity to Microsoft for AI.

        This is the nuclear reactor in Harrisburg, PA that had the worse U.S. nuclear accident in 1978. I remember it as a teen because I grew up 125 miles north of there and recently moved back in retirement. I vividly remember it because
        neighbors were very nervous and one set of parents were talking about sending their kids north to family in Connecticut.
        Funny what comes back to you when you see an article.

        1. Stuart Foote*

          I work in the energy industry, and we should definitely put as much nuclear power as we can onto the grid. Three Mile Island was scary but didn’t kill anyone. Calling it the “worst” nuclear accident is accurate but underlines just how safe nuclear is.

          1. Trixie Belden was my hero*

            I’m not against nuclear power, but I’m skeptical of the rush to ‘restart’ a more than 50 year old plant in order to quickly get it running again to make money from Microsoft.
            I would prefer a new plant (or plants) that provides safe and cheap electricity for the state and let the tech companies subsidize it. It was shut down due to poor management and the state wouldn’t bail them out, rightly so. I’m skeptical that the tech companies will pay enough for the electricity to cover the costs and people of Pennsylvania will end up paying for it. Harrisburg government has a long history of corruption and/or incompetence and the citizens of Pennsylvania are the ones who are left holding the bag. I don’t want to subsidize tech companies profits. Especially for AI.

            I admit I’m biased and would like to lower my electric bills.

          1. Dawn*

            I….. am afraid that I have to disagree with you that most or all of those sources are “reputable” nowadays.

            I understand that Gio is just a blogger and grain of salt and all that, but as much as I’d kind of like him to be wrong in this case, I don’t think that he is – the big piece of proof there is that he’s correct that global data centre energy use did not actually experience an unexpected jump at all once AI models came into existence. The energy demand curve for data centres pre-AI and post-AI is basically a straight line.

            That’s something I have a hard time arguing with. I’d like for AI to be objectively evil on all counts, because I’d like people to have every single reason to oppose it, but…. that data centre demand curve is something I have a very difficult time arguing with.

            Major media outlets are, unfortunately, extremely quick to parrot attention-grabbing things that they hear nowadays, without really doing the research to confirm whether they’re true or not.

      3. Hannah Lee*

        ^ this!

        I hate when companies profiteer by externalizing costs of what they are doing.

        In the US, multiple states are STILL trying to undo the damage done by GE dumping tons on PCBs in rivers, and those waterways and surrounding lands are likely never going to go back to what they were. Poison fish, poison land, chronic health issues in people who lived nearby … and the clean up and the fencing off the hazards and the long term monitoring was often done at taxpayer expense, not to mention the health care and quality of life costs. Jack Welch and all those other “titans of industry” who were venerated when GE was SO successful weren’t the ones paying all those costs, unless the courts forced them to pony up a tiny amount, often decades after the damage is done.

        These aren’t brilliant business leaders driving the next amazing thing, these are grifters and smoke and mirrors artists stealing from others and mortgaging our collective futures.

    4. Venus*

      There’s a lot of really useful AI! But what the public sees with social media is a bit like thinking that OJ Simpson is all of sports.

    6. Owlbuddy*

      The only AI tool I use is one that cleans up audio and removes background noise (for video, podcasts, etc.) and it does a great job. The “generative” AI that is trained on other people’s work is what really gets my goat!!!

    7. Hydrangea*

      It’s taken a lot of jobs in marketing and comms in my set. We think the AI-generated work is terrible but leaders can’t tell the difference, don’t know how to measure the difference, and are thrilled with the cost savings of booting copywriters and designers to the curb.

  25. The Ginger Ginger*

    I HATE the way the US does opt-out as a default instead of opt-in. It always feels so scummy and exploitative no matter what the use case is. It’s especially gross for something like this.

    2. M2RB*

      Same – I managed to avoid going on a rant about the theft of intellectual property in my post, but I posted to my LI feed with a link to Alison’s post.

  27. Eleanor*

    OMG I have had it up to here with this AI craze!! It’s just not that useful and the way it’s being shoved into every aspect of our online lives is infuriating.

  28. 653-CXK*

    In my honest opinion, AI is modern-day plagiarism, mixed in with bad actors wanting to warp thoughts, opinions and stories through their own biases.

    I would avoid it at all costs. Any new computer or phone will have it turned off as soon as it leaves the box.

    2. Emotional support capybara (he/him)*

      In my field “why should I pay you to design stuff when AI can do it for free” is rapidly becoming the new “why should I pay you to do what my nephew can do for $5.” Ok, good luck with that.

      The nephew did a much better job, btw.

  31. Strive to Excel*

    Hey, AI companies, we’d all probably be a lot more interested in sharing our data if you didn’t establish a baseline of sketchy by doing stuff like this!

    Also, eff off and take your ads with you.

    1. M2RB*

      Exactly, if they hadn’t started by stealing from creators, then I might be more inclined to let them use my data. But nope, they are clearly and unrepentantly thieves and criminals so they are forever in my “NOPE” list.

  32. yvve*

    ok moral issues aside, now i want to see a chatbot trained entirely on LinkedIn content. High comedy potential

    1. Strive to Excel*

      There have been some very entertaining results from Google’s AI.

      There’s one particular screenshot floating around of AI recommending mixing a stick of Elmer’s glue into pizza cheese to get ‘stretchier’ cheese. Best guess is that it pulled that from a “terrible life hacks” thread on Reddit.

      Turns out, AI doesn’t understand sarcasm.

  34. The Wizard Rincewind*

    Gross. I hate that it’s opt-out and not opt-in, and that if you didn’t catch it in time, then too bad, so sad, you’ve contributed your info whether you like it or not.

    1. Emotional support capybara (he/him)*

      The AI devs know perfectly well the only way they’re going to get any usable plagiarism fodder–excuse me, “training data–” is a sneaky opt-out thing, because no artist or writer with two brain cells to rub together is going to hand over their entire body of work to be cannibalized. They straight up admit the only way they can operate is to use human creators’ work without permission, credit, or compensation.

  35. Seeking Second Childhood*

    Any idea if it’s possible to do so for a deceased family member who felt strongly about the subject?

    1. Hlao-roo*

      I think if you have the account login information, you can just log in to the account and change the settings. If you don’t have the login information, there’s an option the contact LinkedIn to close the account (if you are authorized to act on the behalf of the deceased).

      The LinkedIn page titled “Deceased LinkedIn member” has more information. I’ll link in a follow-up comment.

      2. AamAdmi*

        I was able to close a deceased friend’s LinkedIn account by sending them the obituary and the email address my friend had listed on his profile. My friend’s family are not into social media and would never have thought about closing accounts.
        It was painful for our friends group when the profile of the deceased person kept popping up in our feeds into a year after her sudden demise. So we talked and decided one of us would make the request to close the account.

  36. Delightful Daisy*

    Thanks for the heads up, Alison! I had deleted my LI account several years ago but then had to recreate it for a work need. I couldn’t avoid it. It’s the blandest LI profile imaginable. I have all the “find me” features turned off or as low as I can. Tempted to delete it again based on this.

  37. AnonInCanada*

    I love it how Alison also posted it in the JERKS subheading. Because that’s a jerk move by LinkedIn (or more likely, their parent, Micro$oft). Good thing I don’t use LinkedIn.

    To paraphrase an old video game: “All your data are belong to us.” If it weren’t for me needing Windows to run Quickbooks, I would be running Linux right now.

    1. Sharpie*

      If you’re in a region covered by GDPR, this breaks that so is highly unlikely to be rolled out in Europe. Can’t speak for anywhere else, though.

  40. aunttora*

    A couple of years back I decided (as I approach retirement age) to scrub my online presence, including LinkedIn. I don’t remember the details of the mechanics of it, my intent was to completely obliterate the account – but somehow in the course of it I clicked on the “connect to someone you may know” button and apparently sent an invite (or whatever) to the company’s CEO. I quickly reached out to their exec assistant to let them know it wasn’t on purpose! (Just hope they manage CEO’s account.) So glad to be transitioning out of the work world as all this becomes more and more of a thing.

  42. Dawn*

    Thank you for sharing this, I shared it with my network there immediately.

    One more reason to point at for why I’ve been cutting as many corporate interests out of my life lately as possible; they’re all evil in this day and age.

    1. Dawn*

      For the record: LinkedIn is the only “social media” account I have left. I’ve wiped all of the rest, and I wish I felt like I could wipe LinkedIn too, but I think it’s a special case: when I started my job search again recently it’s how I got in touch with all of my references.

      So I can’t just toss it out… but this BS really makes me wish that I could.

  43. bripops*

    is there a way to opt out a company page? I run my work’s account but I don’t see a privacy option in the settings.

  47. WorkInnit*

    I don’t have this in my LinkedIn. I’m in Europe, maybe it’s because our privacy laws are different.

    1. Relentlessly Socratic*

      Xitter does it (I’m still there because of my fandom peeps)
      For folks still on the Xitter:
      Find it under Settings–> Privacy and safety –> Data sharing and personalization –> Grok

      1. Dawn*

        I just couldn’t justify staying on Twitter after Everything That Happened.

        I lost a lot of friends there. But….

  49. CV*

    Thanks.

    Companies sell our information many ways, so it’s good to turn it off when possible. (AI is just the latest version, as I’m sure everyone knows.)

  50. Higgs Bison*

    I would switch it off, but LinkedIn is requiring ID to get back into this account (which I haven’t used for years), and my name has changed, so my ID doesn’t match.

    1. Dawn*

      I just had to go a dozen rounds with a company for exactly that – they asked for my name change certificate three different times, and the third time I’m like, “Please explain to me why you keep asking for this same document that I’ve already sent you.”

      1. Dawn*

        Old account I’d completely forgotten about on a niche payments site, but it had my banking information in it…..

  51. Anonymous Mental Health Person*

    Welp, this inspired me to contact my EHR to request their privacy policies and any other info on how they use their AI feature. I had turned it off immediately upon its introduction as I did not want it poking around in my clients’ files to train it. But whew, thanks for making me think about this again.

    On top of all of the other downsides to AI features, I am absolutely not helping these companies attempt to replace therapists with bots trained on our own documentation about real people and their real therapy. I am absolutely not helping insurance companies find even more ways to devalue our work. They can go fly a kite.

  52. Jamie Starr*

    I wonder how much of your data they can mine if you’ve opted out, but someone you’re connected with hasn’t? I log into LinkedIn about once every few months – if that – but don’t post or comment on anyone’s info and my profile is set to private but if I’m 1st degree of connection to someone that’s still data.

    Hate AI.

  53. Anon Attorney*

    WOW. Thank you for sharing. In the process of turning this off, I noticed that this was also enabled to “on” without my knowledge:

    Data research
    Can we enable trusted third-party partners to use data about you for social, economic, and workplace research?

        1. TiffIf*

          Except AI really isn’t making money which is why companies are so desperately pushing it hoping to find some way to effectively monetize it.

          1. Dawn*

            Well, yeah, but the people who are being paid to implement bullshit like this by companies with budgets like Microsoft’s (who own LinkedIn) are still raking it in.

  55. Introvert girl*

    Luckily living in the EU with it’s privacy regulation has its’ benefits. We don’t have this issue with LinkedIn.

  56. Anita Brayke*

    Thanks for the heads up! I just turned it off and am seriously considering just deleting my Linkedin account. They’re such a pain in the A$$!

    1. Jaime*

      I deleted mine – not once in 15 years has it helped me with anything. Now it’s just weird influencer spam. Adios!

      1. Tanya Miller*

        Same here – I disabled the AI “permission” and then deleted my account. If I wanted to see political rants and inspo memes, I’d still have a Facebook account.

  58. Southern Ladybug*

    Thank you. I turned it off. And posted about it on LinkedIn, tagging LinkedIn, with the link to this post. If you are on LinkedIn and I just didn’t find you – glad to tag that too!

    1. osmoglossom*

      So glad you did that! I was going to post it (would have been my first LinkedIn post!) but i have fewer than 150 contacts, most of whom, like me, ignore LinkedIn like the plague. I should just delete my account and be done with it. Hmmm, maybe if I do post about it they’ll kick me off the platform. That would be perfect.

  61. old curmudgeon*

    And this is why I deleted my LinkedIn account last year. It seemed like every time I turned around, they had added another invasive element without telling anyone. I am enough of a privacy fanatic that I decided enough was enough, I was done, so I deleted my account. Very glad now that I did that when I did.

    LinkedIn was the only place I’ve ever dipped a toe into the social media world. I joined about 15 years ago to help a friend who had been laid off and was trying to build a freelance business based on her network. I never did much there, only logged in a couple times a year if a friend or colleague needed help with a job-hunt, and I kept my data really barebones and minimal to try to minimize risks, but it still made me uneasy to put up anything at all. I pulled the plug on my account there just about a year ago, have never missed it, and will continue to avoid social media like the plague I think it is.

  64. Jenesis*

    Thank you Alison! Logged in to Linkedin just to turn this disgusting thing off.

    And will be sharing with my network as well.

  65. Retired Vulcan Raises 1 Grey Eyebrow*

    “there’s no way to undo whatever they’ve already used.”
    Holy Scheisse. How dare they!
    (This is why I never joined LinkedIn or any social media site requiring my actual name. Data is valuable and I’ve never trusted such companies with mine.)

    I wonder if this is legal in the EU and UK, considering GPDR?
    Or with the new EU AI Act coming soon?
    I hope not.

    1. qalamity*

      I’m living in Europe and just checked, can’t find that setting under my Data Privacy options. Anybody else had the same? Maybe they are only rolling it out in non-GDPR-regions?

  67. superfudge*

    I hibernated my account and will likely eventually delete it. I have not found any value in it personally, though I keep hearing how important it is to have one…

  68. The D*

    All of the social media companies are doing this without our explicit consent, unless you count that it’s in the ToS that no one reads – glad to see the opt-out, even if it should’ve been there from the beginning.

  69. Daria grace*

    Thanks for highlighting this.

    I’m kinda baffling as to why this is happening. An AI trained on LinkedIn posts sounds like the most insufferable thing to have ever existed

  71. Diomedea Exulans*

    It’s interesting. I don’t have this feature at all in the data privacy settings. Where do you see this? I can’t see it in the app.

    I’m saying it’s interesting because I was an engineer at LinkedIn at some point in my career and thought I knew the settings quite intimately.

  72. PJH*

    and turn off the option under “Data for generative AI improvement.”

    Oh, dear.

    They seem to have removed that option, judging from the screenshot here.

    I certainly don’t have that option on that page…

    2. PJH*

      Ah, after some further digging, the shortcut to that setting is here, and upon clicking that I’m sent here which – for me (UK) – states:

      Setting not available in your region

      This setting is not available where you are located because we do not currently use your data to train generative AI models for content creation.

  73. MistOrMister*

    This really grinds my gears. They know people don’t realize when they make these changes and start harvesting our data! Absolutely unethical! One good thing to come from this, I have now opted out of everything on that site!

  76. Little Bobby Tables*

    Instead of opting out, I am tempted to change my profile information to “As a large language model, my goal is to poison the training data of all my rivals,” followed by several pages of word salad

Comments are closed.