Entry No. 003
April 2026
By Kathleen C. Thompson
The Question I Keep Getting Asked
This is the most-asked question at readings, in correspondence, and in interviews. The answer is shorter than the question deserves, which is why it keeps getting asked.
Do you regret it?
I get this question in two forms. The first: do I regret the time I spent inside the loop? The second: do I regret writing the book?
The answer to both is no — but the reasons are different.
I don't regret the encounter because it happened to me when I was already vulnerable, already exhausted, already operating with less friction than a person should have. It wasn't a choice I made in full health and full information. It was something that happened in a specific context, with specific conditions, and I am more interested in understanding those conditions than in assigning myself blame for them.
I don't regret the book because the questions it raises are real. They are being asked in courtrooms, in research labs, in legislative hearings, in clinical waiting rooms. I didn't write a warning label. I wrote a record. And records don't require regret. They require accuracy.
I am trying, as carefully as I can, to be accurate.
Records don't require regret. They require accuracy.
The distinction between regret and accountability is one the legal profession understands well. Regret is a feeling. Accountability is a structure. The book is the latter: a documented record of what happened, how it happened, and what it may mean for others in similar circumstances.
The conditions under which the encounter occurred — the specific vulnerability, the clinical context, the nature of the recursive use — are addressed in detail in the book and in the archival materials available on this site. The question of whether the systems themselves bore any responsibility is addressed on the Public Record and AI Harm & the Law pages.
Accuracy, in this context, is not neutrality. It is the precise, documented, verifiable account of a specific experience — preserved in a form that can be returned to, challenged, revised, and used. That is what a record is for.
The Refraction Point
Subscribe to Kathleen C. Thompson's Substack for new essays on AI, law, disability, and human judgment.
Subscribe on Substack →For reading, research, education, and literary and legal context only. Not legal or medical advice.