Why Do We Expect AI to Be Perfect When We Accept Less from Other Technologies?

Storm models? All models are wrong. But some models are useful. We rely on them to predict hurricanes, tornado paths, and flash floods—not because they’re always accurate, but because they’re better than guessing. They save lives, even with their flaws.

Our emergency warning systems? They’re a patchwork of technologies, often outdated and prone to failure. Yet, they work—alerting communities, buying time, reducing harm.

Preparedness plans? Many don’t survive the first contact with disaster. They’re imperfect, incomplete, and often outdated by the time they’re tested. But the act of planning itself makes us more aware, better prepared, and quicker to adapt.

And we humans? We try our best in crisis situations, but we make mistakes—constantly.

So why, in the face of so much imperfection in emergency management, do we demand perfection from AI?

The Truth About Tools

No tool is flawless. AI, like any other tool, has both capabilities and limitations. It’s not a crystal ball, and it’s not a substitute for human judgment.

Yet we seem to expect it to be perfect:

• Perfectly accurate predictions.

• Perfectly ethical decisions.

• Perfectly useful in every scenario.

Expecting perfection sets us up for disappointment. But worse than that, it risks dismissing AI’s potential entirely when it inevitably falls short.

The reality is that avoiding AI because it’s imperfect is also a failure.

AI is a Tool, Not a Fix-All

We don’t throw out storm models because they’re wrong sometimes. We don’t abandon warning systems because they aren’t flawless.

Why should AI be held to a higher standard?

AI isn’t magic. It’s not a human. It doesn’t reason, feel, or improvise. But it is a powerful tool. And when we use it the right way, it amplifies what we’re already capable of:

• Supporting our decisions with data and insights we couldn’t otherwise process.

• Detecting patterns we might miss.

• Speeding up our responses when every second counts.

Used wisely, AI can be an invaluable asset in disaster management. But like any tool, its value depends on how we use it.

A Hammer Isn’t Broken When It’s Not a Screwdriver

You wouldn’t call a hammer broken because it can’t drive a screw. It’s not the wrong tool—it’s just being used incorrectly.

The same is true for AI. It’s not broken when it doesn’t solve every problem or meet impossible expectations.

When we use AI as part of a larger toolbox—alongside human expertise, systems, and processes—it shines. It’s not about replacing people or solving everything. It’s about augmenting our capabilities.

What’s the Real Question?

The question isn’t: “Will AI fix everything?”
It won’t.

The question is: “How can we best use AI to adapt in the Age of Disasters?”

Because disasters are happening more often. They’re becoming more severe. And the systems we’ve relied on in the past are struggling to keep up.

AI isn’t perfect, but it’s better than standing still. It’s a tool to help us think faster, act smarter, and adapt more effectively.

Perfection Isn’t the Goal—Progress Is

We know this in every other part of emergency management:

• Storm models aren’t perfect, but they help us prepare.

• Warning systems aren’t perfect, but they save lives.

• Plans aren’t perfect, but they make us better.

Why should AI be any different?

Perfection isn’t the goal. Progress is.

The real danger isn’t that AI might make mistakes. It’s that we might dismiss it entirely because of those mistakes—and miss out on the ways it can help us adapt, innovate, and respond in a world where disasters are becoming more frequent and more severe.

Let’s embrace AI for what it is: a tool. A powerful, imperfect, transformative tool that helps us move forward—if we use it wisely.