SPECIAL REPORT: The Banana in the Machine, Revisited — How Copilot Tries to Regain Our Trust
Disclosure: This report is based on personal testing and publicly available sources. The author has no financial or professional relationship with Microsoft or any competing AI provider.
Two years ago, a strange moment in AI history began right here — and it still matters to anyone using artificial intelligence today, whether in the kitchen or the boardroom.
The Day a Banana Broke Privacy
Back in 2023, Creative Cooking with AI published two articles exposing a privacy flaw in Microsoft’s early Bing Chat system — what I now call “the banana in the machine.”
The story began with an innocuous prompt about meals for a picky toddler who only ate orange-colored food. But deep inside Bing Chat’s mechanics, a glitch allowed content from one user’s conversation to spill into another’s — including a bizarre reference to bananas and Mount Everest.
It sounded absurd at first — a banana in the machine. But the absurdity was the point: it exposed a privacy breakdown so blatant it could be seen across sessions. I publicly recommended shuttering Bing Chat until the flaw was fixed. Microsoft never fully acknowledged the issue, but the article made waves in AI and privacy circles.
Two Years Later: Copilot and the Filter Block
In 2025, I decided to revisit that incident directly through Microsoft Copilot. I asked it to read the original blog article. To my surprise, it refused — claiming the link was flagged as “unsafe due to adult content.”
Here’s the irony: there was no adult content whatsoever in the article. It deals with AI design, trust, and privacy, not anything explicit. The misclassification suggests that Copilot’s filtering logic either errs too broadly or lacks transparency. If AI can’t reliably distinguish critique from inappropriate content, how can users trust what it hides or shows?
After clarifying the content, I pressed further. Copilot responded:
“Microsoft takes privacy extremely seriously. Every AI product, including Copilot and Bing Chat, is built with safeguards to ensure that your data stays yours. Conversations are designed to be isolated, meaning what you say in your chat is not visible to other users.”
Copilot went on to say that privacy breaches are treated as critical, that systems are monitored for anomalies, and that conversations remain isolated from one another. Its tone was cautious, corporate, and confident — but for those of us who remember the banana, trust isn’t restored with a statement alone. It must earn consistency.
What Caused the Banana? A Technical Lens
In early Bing Chat, those partitions evidently had holes. Context fragments leaked across sessions, creating cross-contamination. In tests, Bing Chat also deflected, contradicted itself, and even provided broken reporting links. The banana wasn’t just a joke — it was a data leak with absurd flavor.
In short... it was a problem. A big problem. A big problem that showed up in a small way. I almost ignored it at the time.
What would have happened if instead of "bananas and Mount Everest" the information would have been private health care or financial data? Or safety-related? Or national security? The world was lucky it was just a banana and Mount Everest... and me. Not information that could do harm and someone willing to do harm with the information.
Copilot in the Marketplace: Struggles Beyond Promises
Copilot faces real challenges beyond technical fixes. The tool’s commercial trajectory shows cracks in its foundation:
- Low adoption vs. licensing hype. Reports suggest that Copilot’s paying subscriber numbers remain far below expectations. (Perspectives Plus)
- Limited enterprise rollout. Many organizations buy licenses but confine use to pilots instead of full deployment. (Lighthouse Global)
- Governance and data risk concerns. Compliance, retention, and permissions remain top obstacles. (Lighthouse Global)
- Branding confusion. Even Microsoft insiders have questioned the clarity of the Copilot brand family. (Windows Central)
- Forced integrations spark pushback. Developers have criticized unwanted Copilot features in GitHub and VS Code. (TechRadar)
- Security concerns in generated code. Independent research revealed that a notable percentage of GitHub Copilot–generated code includes vulnerabilities. (arXiv)
These reports highlight a growing gap between Copilot’s promises and its practical results. Businesses appear interested but cautious, waiting for proof that the system’s benefits outweigh its costs and risks.
What Has Changed Since the Banana
Copilot now claims the earlier issues are behind it — that session boundaries are secure, anomaly detection is continuous, and safeguards are actively maintained. Those commitments sound right, but users also need visibility and verification. Transparency must evolve from policy to habit.
This episode extends far beyond Microsoft. Every developer and AI provider faces the same test: keep data isolated, predictable, and safe. Whether the task is writing a recipe, building a report, or training a model, trust is the baseline requirement. Once broken, it doesn’t return on its own.
In corporate settings, users don’t abandon tools because they’re new; they abandon them because they’re unpredictable. In the kitchen, you wouldn’t reuse a cutting board after raw meat without washing it. Data deserves the same hygiene.
Why This Matters Now
AI systems are no longer tucked away in research labs — they’re embedded in everything from spreadsheets to search engines to smart appliances. That means a privacy lapse in one product can ripple through an entire ecosystem. When a household tool, a student essay, or a restaurant order runs on AI, reliability becomes everyone’s concern. The banana in the machine isn’t just a story from the past; it’s a reminder that every model, from chatbots to cookbots, depends on trust to function.
Trust Is the True Recipe
Copilot earns points for acknowledging past issues. Its tone is more open and measured than Bing Chat’s silence ever was. But reputations aren’t rebuilt by announcements. They’re rebuilt by steady, predictable behavior over time — and by the willingness to let outside observers confirm that privacy really works.
In cooking, contamination kills flavor. In AI, contamination kills trust. The banana in the machine remains a symbol of how ambition can outrun accountability. Copilot’s answers are better than before, but the verdict still depends on what users experience next.
Final Thought
AI’s next generation — whether it powers creative tools, business dashboards, or kitchen assistants — will be judged not by how clever it sounds, but by how reliably it protects what users share. Two years later, the banana may finally be cleaned out of the blender. The real question is whether the lid will stay on this time.
Comments