Words have an impact, more than it may sometimes seem to us. The job of an innovation scout is very different from that of an innovation bouncer. The former searches specifically for innovations, while the latter tries to prevent most innovations from entering and to find all the reasons why they are not innovations. Terms determine the way we look at something, whether we see opportunities or risks, possibilities or limitations, or invite or stifle discussion. I have already written about these effects several times, including here and here.

In his latest newsletter, AI expert Andrew Ng also points out the importance of the choice of words when it comes to AI. The occasion for him was this week’s Artificial Intelligence Action Summit in Paris. There was a lot of talk about AI safety, but never about AI opportunities. Instead of constantly using the term AI safety, Ng suggests talking about responsible AI instead. Here is the wording of his argument:

…while it is important to use AI responsibly and try to stamp out harmful applications, I feel “AI safety” is not the right terminology for addressing this important problem. Language shapes thought, so using the right words is important. I’d rather talk about “responsible AI” than “AI safety.” Let me explain. 

First, there are clearly harmful applications of AI, such as non-consensual deepfake porn (which creates sexually explicit images of real people without their consent), the use of AI in misinformation, potentially unsafe medical diagnoses, addictive applications, and so on. We definitely want to stamp these out! There are many ways to apply AI in harmful or irresponsible ways, and we should discourage and prevent such uses.

However, the concept of “AI safety” tries to make AI — as a technology — safe, rather than making safe applications of it. Consider the similar, obviously flawed notion of “laptop safety.” There are great ways to use a laptop and many irresponsible ways, but I don’t consider laptops to be intrinsically either safe or unsafe. It is the application, or usage, that determines if a laptop is safe. Similarly, AI, a general-purpose technology with numerous applications, is neither safe nor unsafe. How someone chooses to use it determines whether it is harmful or beneficial.

Now, safety isn’t always a function only of how something is used. An unsafe airplane is one that, even in the hands of an attentive and skilled pilot, has a large chance of mishap. So we definitely should strive to build safe airplanes! The risk factors are associated with the construction of the aircraft rather than merely its application. Similarly, we want safe automobiles, blenders, dialysis machines, food, buildings, and much more. 

“AI safety” presupposes that AI, the underlying technology, can be unsafe. I find it more useful to think about how applications of AI can be unsafe.

Further, the term “responsible AI” emphasizes that it is our responsibility to avoid building applications that are unsafe or harmful and to discourage people from using even beneficial products in harmful ways.  

If we shift the terminology for AI risks from “AI safety” to “responsible AI,” we can have more thoughtful conversations about what to do and what not to do.