As
I
was
drafting
this
piece,
Cloudflare
experienced
an
outage
that
froze
the
AI
tools
I
needed
for
background
information.
The
outage
lasted
several
hours.
Imagine
if
I’d
been
working
on
a
brief
due
in
an
hour.
While
the
legal
profession
debates
AI
hallucinations,
privacy
risks,
and
the
adoption
curve,
some
fundamental
threats
that
lurk
beneath
the
surface
are
being
ignored.
The
fact
is
AI
development
could
stall
and
systems
malfunction,
as
explored
here.
And
as
explored
in
a
future
post,
is
it
possible
we
never
get
to
the
point
where
the
efficiency
gains
from
its
use
fully
offset
the
time
needed
to
verify
output?
Legal
in
particular
risks
overreliance
on
something
that
may
not
always
deliver.
Like
the
people
of
Pompeii,
many
sit
blissfully
unaware
of
the
dangers
from
believing
the
volcano
above
us
will
never
erupt.
Where
We
Are
Today
Here’s
where
we
are
today.
-
Vendors
touting
the
magic
of
AI,
developing
ever
increasing
and
more
sophisticated
programs
running
off
AI
platforms
to
do
more
and
more
mysterious
and
mystical
things. -
Pundits
and
commentators
urging
legal
adoption
at
warp
speed. -
Predictions
that
AI
will
disrupt
what
lawyers
do
and
how
they
do
it
by
a
generation
that
barely
has
any
practical
or
hands-on
experience. -
A
belief
in
an
ever
and
exponential
expansion
in
what
AI
can
do. -
Billions
of
venture
capital
dollars
being
poured
into
legal
AI
companies
and
farcically
inflated
valuations. -
Law
firms
investing
million
in
AI
systems
that
replace
core
functions
and
ways
of
doing
things.
There’s
an
ever-increasing
reliance
on
these
AI
systems
to
practice
law
and
an
assumption
that
these
systems
will
not
only
work
flawlessly
but
exponentially
get
better.
But
to
make
all
this
AI
work
you
need
vast
numbers
of
computing
chips.
You
need
data
centers
that
are
expensive
and
time
consuming
to
construct.
You
need
the
energy
to
power
these
huge
data
centers.
More
energy
than
the
existing
systems
can
supply.
That
means
new
power
plants.
The
Numbers
Just
Don’t
Support
Complacency
Some
numbers
from
a
recent
Business
Insider
article
entitled
The
AI
Bubble
You
Haven’t
Heard
About
highlight
this
potential
coming
infrastructure
crisis.
-
Data
center
developers
have
proposed
26
projects
to
major
US
utilities
which
they
say
will
require
some
711
gigawatts
of
power
beyond
present
capacity.
That’s
almost
the
same
amount
of
power
demanded
by
the
continental
US
at
the
summer
peak.-
If
every
already
permitted
data
center
came
online
the
electricity
demanded
could
be
as
high
as
over
293
terawatt
hours.
That’s
about
the
same
amount
of
power
needed
for
the
state
of
Florida
for
a
year.
-
There
is
simply
not
enough
energy
capacity
to
power
all
the
semiconductor
chips
the
data
centers
say
they
will
need.
-
If
Put
simply,
there’s
an
infrastructure
gap
between
the
energy,
the
data
centers,
and
chip
capacity
and
the
coming
need.
And
closing
that
gap
won’t
be
easy.
As
a
former
utility
lawyer,
I
know
you
just
can’t
clap
your
hands
and
say
here’s
more
power.
(There
is
nothing
longer
than
a
state
Public
Service
Commission
proceeding
to
approve
a
new
power
plant.
It’s
like
watching
paint
dry.)
Increasing
capacity
means
building
new
utility
plants.
It
takes
time
to
get
regulatory
approval
to
construct
these
plants
and
time
to
build
them.
Lots
of
time.
And
all
these
estimates
are
based
on
the
assumed
continuing
development
of
AI
and
increased
needs.
If
both
plateau,
then
we
are
left
with
a
huge
amount
of
capacity
but
stagnant
demand.
It’s
a
recipe
for
a
volcano
eruption
for
which
we
aren’t
prepared
And
Then
What?
The
impact
of
the
shortfall
could
be
huge.Think
of
a
fast-growing
city.
The
new
population
inundates
the
existing
road
infrastructure.
We
all
know
the
result.
Think
Atlanta,
Nashville,
LA,
Miami.
You
sit
in
traffic
bottlenecks
for
hours
and
hours,
frustrated.
Wasted
time
and
inefficiency.
The
same
is
true
for
AI.
If
the
data
center
and
utility
and
chip
capacity
can’t
meet
demand,
the
AI
systems
we
all
depend
on
will
be
slowed.
Or
worse,
the
existing
capacity
will
be
throttled
(think
brownouts
when
capacity
is
reached
on
a
hot
summer
day).
Like
the
outage
that
frustrated
my
work
on
this
article,
AI
systems
could
just
stop
working
for
a
time.
Certainly,
models
would
get
more
expensive
to
run.
Development
will
slow
down
and
tools
that
depend
on
newer
models
will
start
to
stagnate.
Training
slows
or
stops.
Capabilities
plateau.
And
if
that
happens,
we
will
be
left
with
no
longer
needed
capacity.
What
About
Legal?
For
AI
tools
to
work
effectively
in
legal,
they
not
only
need
to
be
accurate
(more
on
that
in
a
later
post)
they
need
to
work
at
warp
speed.
-
Lawyers
and
legal
professionals
can’t
sit
around
for
hours
waiting
for
AI
to
supply
a
new
contract
draft. -
They
can’t
wait
days
for
an
AI
tool
to
help
them
prepare
for
a
hearing
or
finalize
a
motion
on
time. -
A
litigation
team
facing
a
discovery
deadline
can’t
tell
the
judge
that
Harvey
was
down. -
Clients
won’t
accept
“the
AI
crashed”
as
an
excuse
for
missed
deadlines
or
shoddy
work.
How
can
firms
meet
client
expectations
when
they’re
relying
on
AI
that
may
not
deliver
as
promised?
-
The
alternative
fee
business
model
with
which
many
firms
are
experimenting
depends
on
AI
doing
a
lot
of
the
work.
What
happens
if
AI
can’t
do
that
work
or
at
least
do
it
in
the
expected
time
frame? -
And
it’s
no
defense
to
a
malpractice
case
that
there
was
an
outage.
Most
of
the
legal
world
is
not
focusing
on
the
risk
the
infrastructure
volcano
will
erupt.
They
aren’t
making
contingency
plans
if
and
when
AI
becomes
constrained
due
to
energy
shortages.
They
aren’t
asking
about
what
happens
if
the
GPU
supply
becomes
threatened.
Or
if
the
cloud
provider
runs
out
of
capacity.
They
don’t
wonder
if
uses
can
be
scaled
to
meet
peak
and
emergency
legal
demands
which
often
happens
in
litigation.
Law
firms
are
making
million-dollar
bets
on
AI
infrastructure
they
don’t
control,
with
vendors
who
can’t
guarantee
uptime
during
peak
demand.
Legal
AI
is
like
Pompeii
before
the
volcano.
Once
it
erupts,
the
cascading
effects
will
be
throughout
the
industry.
Law
firms
could
be
left
with
expensive
tools
they
can’t
use.
The
legal
AI
boom
will
be
just
another
tech
bust.
A
Few
Prophets
Of
course,
not
everyone
in
Pompeii
is
ignoring
the
potential
pitfalls.
Recently,
even
Google
CEO
Sundar
Pichai
sounded
the
alarm
that
no
company
would
be
left
unscathed
if
the
AI
boom
collapses
and
that
there
are
elements
of
irrationality
in
the
market,
according
to
an
Reuters
article.
On
the
other
hand,
fortunately
there
are
plenty
of
entrepreneurs
out
there
looking
for
innovative
solutions.
Entrepreneurs
like
Lance
Dieken,
a
tech
savvy
businessman
with
some
30
years
in
the
IT
industry
and
more
advanced
degrees
than
I
can
count.
His
company,
XYK
Financial,
is
looking
to
solve
the
speed
and
capacity
problems
by
going
smaller
scale.
Building
smaller
data
centers
and
then
powering
these
centers
with
generators
that
depend
on
existing
and
underutilized
energy
sources
like
combined
heat
and
power
(CHP)
close
to
where
the
centers
are.
XYK
is
looking
to
modular
and
quickly
deployable
systems
instead
of
behemoth
data
centers.
Think
local.
The
smaller
scale
and
decentralized
approach
enable
faster
build
time
and
cost-effective
geographic
deployment.
“The
project,”
says
Dieken,
“leverages
existing
geothermal
sources
and
fiber
infrastructure
to
minimize
capital
expense
and
maximize
speed
deployment.”
XYK’s
systems
could
be
used
to
supply
the
needs
of
hospitals,
universities,
and
factories.
And
law
firms:
distributed
systems
like
XYK’s
could
provide
the
backup
capacity
needed
when
big
data
centers
hit
peak
demand
during
major
work
crunches.
And
these
smaller
centers
could
spur
growth
and
jobs
in
rural
locations,
close
to
the
data
centers.
Dieken’s
“keep
it
simple
approach”
allows
him
to
move
fast,
not
worry
about
over
supply
and
meet
the
needs
where
they
are.
We
will
need
this
kind
of
thinking
to
meet
the
infrastructure
problems.
So,
What
Do
We
Do
Now?
Like
the
ancient
city
of
Pompeii,
legal
sits
complacent
to
the
real
fundamental
risk
towering
above
it
with
AI.
In
the
age
of
the
nonstop
AI
hype
machine,
legal
risks
an
overreliance
on
something
that
has
some
fundamental
issues,
as
this
morning’s
experience
taught
me.
One
can
only
imagine
if
the
outage
was
longer
or
more
pervasive
due
to
systemic
infrastructure
problems
or
something
else
What
can
legal
do
to
survive?
Be
aware
of
the
volcano
that
could
and
likely
will
erupt.
Understand
that
there
may
be
limits
to
how
far
AI
can
go
despite
what
everyone
is
saying.
Yes,
we
should
all
be
cognizant
of
the
immense
benefits
that
AI
can
bring.
But
like
good
lawyers,
let’s
look
at
the
potential
problems
and
our
collective
exposure
should
the
AI
tools
plateau
or
even
crater.
Ask
the
hard
questions.
It’s
probably
safe
to
assume,
as
many
say,
AI
is
as
bad
today
as
it’s
ever
going
to
be.
But
take
that
with
a
grain
of
salt:
it
may
not
necessarily
continue
to
exponentially
improve
or
even
work
as
well
and
as
consistently
as
more
is
added.
Let’s
not
lose
our
heads.
Smart
firms
should
diversify
their
AI
dependencies,
maintain
analog
backup
processes,
and
avoid
betting
their
client
service
on
infrastructure
they
can’t
control.
And
not
believe
everything
the
vendors
promise.
Stephen
Embry
is
a
lawyer,
speaker,
blogger,
and
writer.
He
publishes TechLaw
Crossroads,
a
blog
devoted
to
the
examination
of
the
tension
between
technology,
the
law,
and
the
practice
of
law.
Melissa
Rogozinski
is
CEO
of
the
RPC
Round
Table
and
RPC
Strategies,
LLC,
a
marketing
and
advertising
firm
in
Miami,
FL.