There is a great deal of buzz lately around the use of so-called AI agents. For those willing to invest the time and effort required to automate routine tasks, these systems may prove useful.
The problem is not automation itself, but the language we’ve chosen to describe it.
Agentification — the current term for automating tasks with AI is misleading, and some caution is warranted. In the human world, an agent is not simply someone who performs tasks on our behalf. An agent enters into a fiduciary relationship. Whether selling a home or representing creative work, that agent is legally and ethically bound to place our interests above all others, including their own.
AI systems have no such obligation.
AI bots and automation tools are not constrained in any way to act in our best interest. They are closer to automated machinery: once given a task, they reliably execute it, without judgment, context, or accountability.
Perhaps the appeal of the word agent is that it sounds warmer and more personal than automation. Automation carries cultural baggage, especially when human labor is replaced by machines. Agent feels collaborative. Human. Reassuring.
But that reassurance implies something that does not exist, responsibility, and specifically fiduciary responsibility.
If the effort required to automate your common tasks is worth it, by all means do so. Just be clear-eyed about what you are using. AI is not an agent you can hold accountable. It is a tool.
Accountability always remains with you.
Leave a Reply