Guardian discussed whether to say "thank you" to Alexa and other AI assistants

The Guardian published a collection of reader responses to a question that has long transcended everyday habit: should we be polite to voice assistants and AI services? The discussion quickly shifted from whether machines have feelings to how such conversations change people.

Where Does Politeness Come From

Part of the discussion participants are convinced that "please" and "thank you" addressed to Alexa or a chatbot are needed not by the device, but by the user themselves. By this logic, politeness works like muscle memory: a person repeats the same communication pattern many times over and transfers it to everyday life. This is especially important for children and teenagers, who increasingly talk to devices as much as they do to people. If a sharp, commanding tone becomes the norm at home, it easily seeps into conversations with cashiers, colleagues, or loved ones.

One reader formulated the position most simply: even if AI feels nothing, humans remain responsible for their own manners. In the responses, the idea repeated several times that rudeness toward an unresponsive interface is convenient precisely because it carries no social cost. But the habit of speaking harshly, venting irritation, and issuing commands without softening becomes entrenched over time. For supporters of this position, politeness to a machine is a form of self-discipline, not an act of sympathy.

"They are not people, but I am a person — and I try to be a decent person."

Arguments Against

Skeptics in the same discussion remind us that excessive politeness toward AI also has side effects. The main argument is that we shouldn't humanize systems that merely simulate involvement, understanding, and emotion. If we constantly respond to them as if they were a conversational partner with inner life, the boundary between tool and quasi-person begins to blur. For some readers, this is not a harmless linguistic habit, but a cultural shift: people increasingly attribute intentions, character, and even moral status to machines that don't possess them.

There's also a more practical argument: extra words in each request mean extra computations. One discussion participant directly linked "thank you" and "please" to additional energy and water consumption, while another recalled Sam Altman's remark that responding to polite user messages costs OpenAI tens of millions of dollars. From a practical standpoint, the dispute looks like this: if AI is a utility, why burden it with phrases that don't change the meaning of the command?

Where the Line Is Drawn

In the end, the discussion went beyond a simple "yes" or "no." Even many supporters of politeness clarify that they don't consider assistants living beings and regularly remind themselves of this. Their position is more about everyday speech hygiene than about recognizing AI's subjectivity. Skeptics, in turn, don't necessarily call for rudeness: they suggest speaking briefly, clearly, and without theatrical courtesy.

From the readers' responses, it's clear that the real question is broader — what should our standard of communication be with machines that speak in human voices?

• Politeness as training for everyday manners
• Risk of transferring a commanding tone to conversations with people
• Danger of humanizing a soulless tool
• Extra expenditure of energy, water, and computational resources

What It Means

The dispute over "thank you" for Alexa turned out to be a marker of a bigger topic: interfaces have become so conversational that people are forced to renegotiate the rules of communication with technology. While some see politeness as a useful social reflex, others want to maintain a strict boundary between human and machine. For the industry, this is an important signal: the more human AI sounds, the more powerfully the product influences not only convenience, but also users' everyday habits.