Readers have responded to a recent article by Nesrine Malik on the risks of artificial intelligence, warning that overreliance on the technology could weaken trust in evidence and public discourse. One reader, Dr Simon Nieder from Chesterfield, Derbyshire, agreed with Malik's concerns about fabricated quotations and unreliable research, noting that the deeper problem is AI's relationship with evidence. He argued that writers caught out by false quotations were often not trying to deceive, but had misplaced confidence in a system that produces plausible reconstructions without distinguishing between observation, inference or generation.
Another reader, Alan Wenban-Smith from Birmingham, recalled first encountering AI in 1989 during a feasibility study for a science park linked to Edinburgh University. He said developments since have increased his scepticism and converted it to deep concern. He highlighted AI's dependence on large language models, which makes its language glib and persuasive but the ideas derivative and unoriginal. He warned that as more training data becomes AI-generated, this backward-looking character could worsen in a vicious circle, and questioned whether the UK can risk inviting such technology into the heart of the economy, society and governance.
Michael Peel from London argued that AI has no empathy, emotions or ability to sense them in others, making creative and artistic outputs lack feeling. He criticised tech billionaires who profit from AI by exploiting others' ideas, saying empathy interferes with their egotistical vision of progress. Dianne Lewis from Norland, West Yorkshire, defended the term Luddite, noting that the original Luddites were prescient artisans protecting their livelihoods against repressive employers, and suggested the epithet should be worn proudly rather than disparaged.
Elizabeth Cope from Dorking, Surrey, said she does not believe AI could produce a writer like Dickens or Rumi, as AI-generated text lacks a real soul speaking. She said there is no voice that is human, unique and irreplaceable.
