Every day, we publish a selection of your emails in our newsletter. We’d love to hear from you, you can email us at yoursay@theconversation.edu.au
Monday August 11
Genocide?
“I would be very interested in the views of the legal and genocide experts as to whether they consider the massacre by Hamas on 7 October 2023 and the subsequent torture and murder of the hostages they captured to be genocide too? Given the very broad definition of the word ‘genocide’, I’m also interested in whether there is now another specific term for the intentional systematic killing of a group of people – for example, by rounding them up and forcing them into gas chambers?”
Pnina Levine, Deputy Head of Curtin University Law School
AI slaves
“Artificial intelligence looks set to take over all of the higher paid ‘intelligent’ financial, IT and accounting jobs, leaving humans to become the ‘slaves’ working as cleaners, personal carers and hospitality workers. This doesn’t encourage kids at school to study hard. What’s the point of going to university if your job is just going to be taken over by AI?”
Kylie Freak 
Artificial Unintelligence
“Your recent fascination with so-called ‘AI’ is one-sided and starry-eyed. This technology is NOT intelligent – it can only rehash what it has seen – and is radically contributing to declines both in human intelligence and the possibility for a healthy climate.”
Clifford Heath
Tuesday August 12
Muddying the waters
“I’m disappointed that you chose to publish the recent comment by academic Pnina Levine (above, August 11). It undermines genuine concern over the genocide currently taking place in Gaza — a matter that is, in fact, under consideration by the International Court of Justice.”
Samantha Altmann
Save the AND
“The Australian National Dictionary is a cultural icon. It must continue in perpetuity. Recording and disseminating the evolution of our language is integral to who we were, who we are, and who we may become. Things must be desperate at the ANU to target the AND. Are there no other savings to be had such as reducing senior executive salaries by 10% or reducing the extent of fixtures and fittings in planned new capital works?”
Dr John Halsey, Emeritus Professor, Flinders University
Embracing…
“Watching our new tourism ad, I cannot fathom why many Australians refuse to acknowledge and share that the world’s oldest living culture is here. What about Indigenous fashion and music? What about ancient fish traps and storytelling in the stars? The colour, the vibrance and the open hearts are ready and we need to proudly embrace them as part of our welcome to visitors.”
Val Adamson
Wednesday August 13
Open minds
“Your article about a million-year-old stone tool says Homo erectus arrived in Sulawesi ‘by accident’ and that it’s unlikely they had the ‘cognitive ability to develop watercraft capable of making sea voyages’. This reminds me of the first Europeans who encountered the Great Zimbabwe Ruins in the late 19th century who concluded that an unknown ‘superior’ people must have occupied the area because Africans could not have built such a complex – only to later realise that Africans did indeed have the ability to conceive of and build such a complex. Any interpretive science (including my own field of geology) requires an open mind rather than a mind blinkered by preconceived notions and unfounded assumptions.”
Dr Phillip Plummer, Visiting Research Fellow, Geology, Adelaide University
Thursday August 14
You had lots of feedback on a provocative article by Peter Siminski and Roger Wilkin, who argued it could be time to consider some form of taxation on the family home.
Sweetening the deal
“Very good to see analysis of by far the biggest tax benefits in housing – those that accrue to owner occupiers. It seems likely that taxing these benefits will be too politically unpopular to implement, but what if there was a sweetener? Taxing capital gains on owner occupied housing, or taxing other benefits, could be more politically acceptable if at the same time the interest on home loans was made tax deductible.”
Graham Partington, retired finance academic
Tax the rich
“I was outraged by this article. Sure, go ahead and tax owners of multiple homes, but the average punter who is just managing to pay off their mortgage on the family home isn’t the one who needs to be taxed more. The tax change that needs to be made is to the megarich who are the ones forcing people out of the housing market.”
Victoria Honey
Why should we be penalised?
“We are in our late 70s and own our home. It wasn’t given to us – we worked hard and went without, to get it. I’ve never had a trip overseas and own a flip phone not a smart phone. These are all things we have done so we can afford and keep our home. Why should we be penalised for going without, so we aren’t looking for a rental or living in a tent?”
Keith and Christine Bourne
Friday August 15
Productivity vs actual gains
“Since the 1970s, the promise of progress has quietly shifted. Back then, a single-income household could reasonably expect to pay off a home in a decade. Today, that dream feels increasingly out of reach for younger generations, who face soaring housing costs, stagnant wages, and longer working hours. We’re paying more, earning less in relative terms, and sacrificing time – our most finite resource. The irony is stark: as technology advances and automation promises to lighten our load, the benefits seem unevenly distributed. Artificial intelligence is poised to absorb many high-paying office roles, leaving behind a landscape dominated by trades and physical services. These jobs are essential, but the shift raises uncomfortable questions about economic mobility, dignity of work, and the future of the middle class. If productivity gains don’t translate into better lives – more time, more security, more opportunity – then what are we really optimising for?”
Scott Draffin