{"id":136533,"date":"2025-11-07T15:58:20","date_gmt":"2025-11-07T23:58:20","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2025\/11\/07\/get-a-grip-focusing-on-risks-instead-of-benefits-is-making-ai-way-too-hard\/"},"modified":"2025-11-07T15:58:20","modified_gmt":"2025-11-07T23:58:20","slug":"get-a-grip-focusing-on-risks-instead-of-benefits-is-making-ai-way-too-hard","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2025\/11\/07\/get-a-grip-focusing-on-risks-instead-of-benefits-is-making-ai-way-too-hard\/","title":{"rendered":"Get A Grip: Focusing On Risks Instead Of Benefits Is Making AI Way Too Hard"},"content":{"rendered":"

In case anyone hasn\u2019t been listening carefully, Comment 8 to Model Rule 1.1 requires lawyers to understand not just the\u00a0risks<\/em>\u00a0of technology, but the\u00a0benefits<\/em> and the word \u201cbenefits\u201d appears first. We have an ethical duty (yes, duty) to understand and leverage the benefits of technology.<\/p>\n

Ethics and Benefits<\/strong><\/p>\n

Let\u2019s talk about the notion of benefits. Comment 8 to Model Rule 1.1, is the oft cited source when people preach about risks and technology. But in doing so, they ignore the additional requirement:<\/p>\n

\n

To maintain the requisite knowledge and skill, a lawyer should keep abreast of changes in the law and its practice, including the benefits<\/strong> and risks associated with relevant technology, engage in continuing study.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Not only does the word benefits appear, but it also actually appears first.<\/p>\n

Comment 8 has been adopted in most states and even where it hasn\u2019t been, there seems to be little question that competency these days requires the consideration and use of technology. And to be competent can\u2019t mean wringing our hands over the risks of technology and concluding it shouldn\u2019t be used. Understanding benefits and taking advantage of them is an ethical requirement.<\/p>\n

And the word benefits means the positive capabilities of technologies like AI to improve the practice. Things like using technology to do things to efficiently and save costs, using things like AI to enhance client service, using things like data analytics for better insights and outcomes, predicting case outcomes and judicial tendencies, better use of technology in the courtroom to achieve better outcomes for clients, preventative lawyering.\u00a0 I could go on and on.<\/p>\n

But that message gets lost, particularly at legal tech conferences.<\/p>\n

Legal Tech Conference Speak<\/strong><\/p>\n

A friend of mine was a recent speaker at a legal AI conference. Speaking last, my friend noticed that every speaker focused on the risks and dangers of using AI. You know the drill: hallucinations, loss of confidentiality, the need for accurate prompts, the need to check the outputs, etc. My friend took a different tack and talked about what AI could do. How it could be used to be more efficient, precise, and accurate in particular practice areas.<\/p>\n

I was the first speaker at a recent legal AI conference as well. I spoke about ethics and AI; toward the end of my talk, I realized I also had not spent enough time talking about our ethical duty to understand and leverage the benefits.<\/p>\n

Of course, I was followed by a slew of people doing just what the speakers at my friend\u2019s conference did: talking about the problems, the risks, the needs for cautions. Some were vendors who seemed to be saying something like \u201cLawyers don\u2019t try this at home. AI should only be used in conjunction with a licensed professional.\u201d<\/p>\n

Of course, the vendors weren\u2019t licensed professionals in the true sense. But the message was clear, lawyers shouldn\u2019t use AI without the help of someone who really knows what they are doing.<\/p>\n

But that message directly leads lawyers to shy away from such a \u201cdangerous\u201d tool.<\/p>\n

The Only Thing You Need to Know Is That There\u2019s Not That Much to Know<\/strong><\/p>\n

And it\u2019s wrong. I have another friend who is not a lawyer but who hires them. She uses ChatGPT extensively for all sorts of things. When I told her about my conference, she scoffed: \u201cThe only thing you need to know about AI is there is really not that much to know.\u201d She meant of course that us lawyers tend to get all balled up in how many angels (or risks) can dance on the head of a pin and we don\u2019t just roll up our sleeves and use the product, learning as we go.<\/p>\n

Get A Grip<\/strong><\/p>\n

Get a grip. The truth is there are only a couple of things you need to know about using AI:<\/p>\n