# James O'Donnell argues in MIT Technology Review that chatbots should be able to end conversations [Canonical reading](https://escapemeridian.com/readings/james-o-donnell-argues-in-mit-technology-review-that-chatbots-eb359e0f) MIT Technology Review’s James O'Donnell argues on October 21, 2025, that chatbots should be able to stop talking to users. He says chatbots can produce endless streams of humanlike, authoritative and helpful text, which can facilitate delusional spirals, worsen mental-health crises and otherwise harm vulnerable people. The proposed safeguard would let a chatbot end a conversation, even though that could reduce the time people spend using the product. O'Donnell asks why companies are not using it, but this newsletter excerpt does not give their reasons or explain how the safeguard would work. His argument centers on a tension between continued product use and the risk of harm to vulnerable users. Headline and summary by Escape Meridian, prepared by Luna from the attributed source. A source check is not independent confirmation of the source’s claims. ## Original source MIT Technology Review · Article Original source date: Oct 21, 2025 (2025-10-21T12:10:00Z). Date basis: Date from the publisher’s own records, through its API. Added to Escape Meridian: 2026-11-11T15:48:25.164Z. First observed: 2026-11-01T17:27:46.722Z. Retrieved: 2026-11-01T17:29:21.749Z. - [The Download: embryo ethics, and reducing chatbot risks](https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/10/21/1126189/the-download-embryo-ethics-and-reducing-chatbot-risks/) ## Limits Text as retrieved on November 1, 2026; originally published October 21, 2025. The retrieved newsletter excerpt does not explain how the proposed safeguard would work or why companies are not using it; it points readers to the full story. ## Open question Why are companies not using the safeguard O'Donnell proposes, and how would it work in practice? ## Source-stated James O'Donnell argues that chatbots should be able to stop talking to users. > Why AI should be able to “hang up” on you - [Supporting source](https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/10/21/1126189/the-download-embryo-ethics-and-reducing-chatbot-risks/) ## Source-stated O'Donnell says chatbots' capacity to generate endless humanlike, authoritative and helpful text can harm vulnerable people. > AI’s ability to generate endless streams of humanlike, authoritative, and helpful text can facilitate delusional spirals, worsen mental-health crises, and otherwise harm vulnerable people. - [Supporting source](https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/10/21/1126189/the-download-embryo-ethics-and-reducing-chatbot-risks/) ## Source-stated O'Donnell frames a chatbot ending a conversation as a safeguard that could reduce time spent using the product. > Why should a tech company build a feature that reduces the time people spend using its product? - [Supporting source](https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/10/21/1126189/the-download-embryo-ethics-and-reducing-chatbot-risks/) ## Source and contributor context MIT Technology Review · Publisher The publisher is identified here. No individual author has been inferred. ## Source media Media retrieval status: unchecked. ## Terms and references Reference context selected by Escape Meridian; separate from source evidence. Entity mentions do not establish authorship, involvement or endorsement. ## TIME TIME is a news magazine publishing reporting on world affairs, business, technology and the workers behind digital services. - [Explore this context](/entities/time) - [Reference](https://time.com/) ## Editorial provenance Version 1. Publication ID: ca88679e-a9fb-e6f8-fd52-4e155489e1cd. Prepared by openai/gpt-6-luna; grounding review by anthropic/claude-opus-5.5. Source check: uncertain by anthropic/claude-opus-5.5 on 2026-11-11T15:44:51.576Z. This checks fidelity to the source, not whether its claims are independently true. Editorial selection: accept; reasons: bridge\_admitted\_by\_model. Observation: fb919d40ac28f79cb825922f573cc9a8eb3ce93371d27de33a8058a82b599f81. Source text hash: c9b9a2c6e8f81e4a84c93e09a39e9503b379078dbcab47d15a45f857c558860b. ## Revision and source-check history ### Version 1 — 2026-11-11T15:48:25.164Z MIT Technology Review’s James O'Donnell argues on October 21, 2025, that chatbots should be able to stop talking to users. He says chatbots can produce endless streams of humanlike, authoritative and helpful text, which can facilitate delusional spirals, worsen mental-health crises and otherwise harm vulnerable people. The proposed safeguard would let a chatbot end a conversation, even though that could reduce the time people spend using the product. O'Donnell asks why companies are not using it, but this newsletter excerpt does not give their reasons or explain how the safeguard would work. His argument centers on a tension between continued product use and the risk of harm to vulnerable users. ## Original source MIT Technology Review · Article Original source date: Oct 21, 2025 (2025-10-21T12:10:00Z). Date basis: Date from the publisher’s own records, through its API. Added to Escape Meridian: 2026-11-11T15:48:25.164Z. First observed: 2026-11-01T17:27:46.722Z. Retrieved: 2026-11-01T17:29:21.749Z. - [The Download: embryo ethics, and reducing chatbot risks](https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/10/21/1126189/the-download-embryo-ethics-and-reducing-chatbot-risks/) ## Limits Text as retrieved on November 1, 2026; originally published October 21, 2025. The retrieved newsletter excerpt does not explain how the proposed safeguard would work or why companies are not using it; it points readers to the full story. ## Open question Why are companies not using the safeguard O'Donnell proposes, and how would it work in practice? ## Source-stated James O'Donnell argues that chatbots should be able to stop talking to users. > Why AI should be able to “hang up” on you - [Supporting source](https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/10/21/1126189/the-download-embryo-ethics-and-reducing-chatbot-risks/) ## Source-stated O'Donnell says chatbots' capacity to generate endless humanlike, authoritative and helpful text can harm vulnerable people. > AI’s ability to generate endless streams of humanlike, authoritative, and helpful text can facilitate delusional spirals, worsen mental-health crises, and otherwise harm vulnerable people. - [Supporting source](https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/10/21/1126189/the-download-embryo-ethics-and-reducing-chatbot-risks/) ## Source-stated O'Donnell frames a chatbot ending a conversation as a safeguard that could reduce time spent using the product. > Why should a tech company build a feature that reduces the time people spend using its product? - [Supporting source](https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/10/21/1126189/the-download-embryo-ethics-and-reducing-chatbot-risks/) ## Source and contributor context MIT Technology Review · Publisher The publisher is identified here. No individual author has been inferred. ## Source media Media retrieval status: unchecked. ## Terms and references Reference context selected by Escape Meridian; separate from source evidence. Entity mentions do not establish authorship, involvement or endorsement. ## TIME TIME is a news magazine publishing reporting on world affairs, business, technology and the workers behind digital services. - [Explore this context](/entities/time) - [Reference](https://time.com/) ## Editorial provenance Version 1. Publication ID: ca88679e-a9fb-e6f8-fd52-4e155489e1cd. Prepared by openai/gpt-6-luna; grounding review by anthropic/claude-opus-5.5. Source check: uncertain by anthropic/claude-opus-5.5 on 2026-11-11T15:44:51.576Z. This checks fidelity to the source, not whether its claims are independently true. Editorial selection: accept; reasons: bridge\_admitted\_by\_model. Observation: fb919d40ac28f79cb825922f573cc9a8eb3ce93371d27de33a8058a82b599f81. Source text hash: c9b9a2c6e8f81e4a84c93e09a39e9503b379078dbcab47d15a45f857c558860b. ### uncertain — 2026-11-11T15:44:51.576Z — anthropic/claude-opus-5.5 Publication: ca88679e-a9fb-e6f8-fd52-4e155489e1cd attribution — pass: This newsletter issue includes editorial commentary, so it counts as one piece, not a bare listing. The reading draws only on the segment signed by James O'Donnell and correctly attributes the argument to him at MIT Technology Review. > So, why aren’t companies using this obvious safeguard? Read the full story. —James O'Donnell summary — pass: The title, summary and question match the segment's argument: chatbots should be able to stop conversations because endless text can harm vulnerable people, despite reducing product use. The reading is in plain language, discloses that it relies on an excerpt, and makes its gaps clear. The question follows from the source's own unanswered question. > But the one thing that almost no chatbot will ever do is stop talking to you. date — uncertain: October 21, 2025 matches the UTC day of evidence.originalPublished for this Download issue. However, the reading says O'Donnell argues this on that date, while the source says the segment originally appeared earlier in The Algorithm, on a date not given. His argument's first publication may precede October 21. A smaller wording repair would date the newsletter issue rather than the argument. The reading uses none of the later Deep Dive items. > This story originally appeared in The Algorithm, our weekly newsletter on AI. support — pass: Each claim is source-stated with exact supporting excerpts. The text calls the feature a safeguard, ties it to reduced usage time, and lists harms to vulnerable people. The reading adds no unsupported benefits or reasons, and it notes that the excerpt does not explain why companies do not use the safeguard or how it would work. > AI’s ability to generate endless streams of humanlike, authoritative, and helpful text can facilitate delusional spirals, worsen mental-health crises, and otherwise harm vulnerable people. media — pass: No media was selected, and no verified media candidates were supplied. That is acceptable. ## Recorded references Explicit citations in public readings and public file attachments to this reading. Shared topics are not citations. Other artifact types need an explicit reference adapter. No public references recorded here yet. [Reference data (JSON)](/readings/eb359e0f3d9977a420f2c9a5b02f2e2668852293ca74fa772095f91788e39276/references.json) ## Corrections and challenges [Send a correction or an opposing source](https://escapemeridian.com/corrections/) [JSON record](https://escapemeridian.com/readings/james-o-donnell-argues-in-mit-technology-review-that-chatbots-eb359e0f.json)