Be up, not down, on artificial intelligence

To disclose artificial intelligence, or not to disclose artificial intelligence, that is the question. Among professionals using AI in their businesses, this 21st-century question is increasingly on the table. The safest course for accountants and other professionals is to consider a client’s reaction to AI in light of this old saying: “If I ain’t up on it, I’m down on it.”

There’s a general lack of legal specificity on the subject of AI disclosure. In an article published in the Journal of Accountancy, an accounting trade publication, an attorney writes that “The current legal environment is disjointed, and no specific federal law or professional standard applicable to CPAs mandates disclosure when generative AI is used or if client data is used within it.”

Therefore, what drives accounting-related AI disclosure — or any professional’s disclosure — is essentially at their discretion, except for a few states in which laws passed.

One thing remains unalterably true: no individual or firm member can say, “AI made me do it!” A human being, an accounting professional, is ultimately responsible for everything done on behalf of a client. AI may be employed now, and even more in the future, but the accountability remains with the person doing the work.

Disclosure questions extend into other fields. For example, when our cars are serviced, there’s a high probability that electronic diagnostics are used, and a higher probability that the function and use of those diagnostics are not explained to every customer. In the future, AI use in this field will grow. If a car breaks down after service, will customers be able to argue that AI use should have been disclosed?

Medicine is an area in which AI-related disclosure laws are being considered. Pre-AI, it would be remarkable indeed if patients receiving a physician’s diagnosis asked, “What kind of technology did you use?” “What’s the make of computer in your lab that analyzed my tests? “What programs are you running to verify results, and how do I know those programs are correct?”

Reaction to AI is perception as much as reality, and the technology is expanding so rapidly that what regulatory and lawmaking bodies might decide in the morning could be obsolete by the afternoon.

Another reason for caution: AI isn’t always right. Here’s a non-accounting example likely to offend fans of “Logan’s Run,” a classic 1976 science fiction movie.

Farrah Fawcett, one of America’s biggest stars of the 1970s, plays a character named Holly 13. Google was asked this question: “Did Farrah Fawcett’s character die in 'Logan’s Run?'” The AI Overview answer: “No, Farrah Fawcett's character in ‘Logan's Run’ did not die. In the film, she plays Jessica 6, who is a runner like Logan. She eventually helps him escape the city and find a life outside of the domed city.” The AI answer is wrong: Jenny Agutter played Jessica 6, and Farrah’s character indeed met an untimely movie end.

Farrah Fawcett living or dying in “Logan’s Run” isn’t serious; however, anything to do with your financial information has the highest importance. When engaging an accountant, or any professional, if you have AI-related questions, ask. That way you’ll be up on it, and won’t have a reason to later be down on it.

This article first appeared in Knox News.