Some people took me to task for over-simplifying the issue. Fair. Some seemed to think that I didn't understand that AI and Automation were separate things, and they helpfully sent me links to Wikipedia pages and dictionary definitions of AI. Very kind, but unnecessary. I assure you, I understand the differences.
My underlying point - and admittedly I sometimes meander on my way to getting there, which can cause confusion, consternation, and even anger among my less patient readers - was that, much of what we call artificial intelligence in the legal industry is simply the automation of historically manual processes. And if we refer to these things as "Automation" instead of "Artificial Intelligence" we are more likely to have intelligent, thoughtful, and meaningful conversations about the future of legal practice, than we are to run screaming through the halls, crying uncontrollably, and tearing out our hair for fear of the robots coming for our jobs.
I know many of you will find this hard to believe, as I usually revel in setting verbal fires, but my goal in abandoning "Artificial Intelligence" as a term was to improve the overall quality of discourse surrounding the use of Artificial Intelligence in the practice of law.
John Alber, former Strategic Innovation Partner at Bryan Cave and current Futurist-in-Residence for ILTA, called me out for over-simplifying.
Arrgh! Fine. I'm not going to fight with John, he was the first person I ever met and an ILTA conference and, more relevantly, he's right. So I suggested an alternative.@eDepoze @rmcclead @Vizlegal #Automation goes too far the other way. It's a 40s term applicable to a wide range of noncomputing processes.— John Alber (@johnalber) December 7, 2015
But Kenneth Grady, former CEO of SeyfarthLean and current Legal Future Evangelist rightfully suggested:I.A.: Intelligent Automation https://t.co/qYTrAMZiBP— Ryan McClead (@rmcclead) December 7, 2015
So I stewed. Pushed it to the back of my mind and focused on other far less interesting, but more profitable things like work. Until today during lunch, when I was reading an article on Augmented Reality and it suddenly hit me. The middle ground between Artificial Intelligence and Automation is Augmented Intelligence.Nah, everyone would think it was a typo. https://t.co/BIO42KijtV— Kenneth A. Grady (@LeanLawStrategy) December 7, 2015
I suggested this alternative to my twitter colleagues and Kenneth Grady helpfully suggested the addition of Human.
And there it was, the term I was looking for.What about AHI (Augmented Human Intelligence)? Avoids AI confusion & emphasizes role of humans. https://t.co/E5cMhs0CNP— Kenneth A. Grady (@LeanLawStrategy) December 8, 2015
Augmented. Human. Intelligence. #AHI
So, today I am calling for a moratorium on the term Artificial Intelligence in the practice of law (unless you are actually talking about a Turing machine that bills by the hour), because whether we're discussing Watson, Ross, Kira, or Kim, we're talking about Augmented Human Intelligence.