New York’s AI Law: The Perfect Recipe for Digital Molasses
New York has just taken a significant step in AI governance with Governor Hochul signing the Legislative Oversight of Automated Decision-Making in Government Act (LOADinG Act).
This legislation establishes strict guidelines for how state agencies can use AI and automated systems. Here’s why this matters:
Key Features of the LOADinG Act
- Mandatory Human Oversight: No state agency can use AI or automated decision-making systems without “meaningful human review.” This means trained professionals must have the power to approve, modify, or reject AI-generated decisions.
- Regular Impact Assessments: Agencies must conduct thorough evaluations every two years and before any significant system changes. These assessments examine:
– System objectives and effectiveness
– Algorithm transparency
– Bias and discrimination testing
– Cybersecurity vulnerabilities
– Privacy risks
– Potential misuse scenarios
- Strong Accountability Measures:
– Impact assessments must be submitted to top state officials 30 days before implementation
– Assessments will be publicly available on agency websites
– Immediate system shutdown required if discriminatory outcomes are detected
CRITICAL COMMENT: The Empire State’s AI Straitjacket
Welcome to Albany’s latest masterpiece of bureaucratic artistry, where innovation goes to drown in paperwork. New York’s freshly minted LOADinG Act reads like a love letter to red tape, co-authored by the ghosts of efficiency’s past and present-day labor unions.
Picture this: You’re a bright-eyed tech entrepreneur with a brilliant AI solution that could slash DMV wait times in half. But before your first line of code can touch a government computer, you’ll need to navigate a labyrinth of impact assessments, human oversight committees, and enough documentation to wallpaper the Empire State Building. Twice.
Let’s talk about that “meaningful human review” requirement. Sounds reasonable, right? Like having a responsible adult supervising the playground. Except this playground monitor needs to file a report every time a child goes down the slide, and the slide needs a biennial safety assessment that makes nuclear plant inspections look like a casual once-over.
The act essentially declares war on workplace evolution. It’s as if New York looked at the industrial revolution and said, “Nah, we’re good with manual looms, thanks.” The law forbids agencies from reducing work hours through automation or transferring tasks to AI systems. It’s job protection with a vengeance, ensuring that if there’s a less efficient way to do something, by golly, we’ll find it and preserve it in legislative amber.
The cost? Oh, just the small matter of New York’s competitive edge in the 21st century. While other states are sprinting toward digital transformation, the Empire State is meticulously crafting its own digital stone age, complete with mandatory human oversight of calculator functions (I’m only half joking – the definition of “automated decision-making system” is broad enough to make a spreadsheet nervous).
Don’t get me wrong – protecting workers and ensuring AI fairness are noble goals. But this law doesn’t just move the goalposts; it digs them up, fills the holes with concrete, and demands a environmental impact study before allowing anyone to play ball again.
The real victims here aren’t just the obvious ones – state agencies drowning in paperwork or tech companies fleeing to more innovation-friendly pastures. It’s the New Yorkers who’ll be stuck in longer lines, waiting for humans to meaningfully review what a computer could do in milliseconds, all while paying higher taxes for the privilege.
And let’s talk about that bias detection requirement. Find any bias in your system? Shut it down immediately! It’s like demanding we close every highway where someone speeds – a solution that creates more problems than it solves.
The cherry on top? The law requires public disclosure of these assessments, but with enough redaction allowances to make a CIA document look chatty. So we’re achieving neither true transparency nor practical security – just a beautiful demonstration of bureaucratic theater.
What could we do instead? How about a tiered approach that matches oversight to actual risk? Or focusing on worker retraining instead of job preservation? Maybe even – and I know this is radical – letting some basic automation happen without treating it like a threat to democracy?
In the end, the LOADinG Act feels less like thoughtful regulation and more like digital protectionism dressed up in safety concerns. It’s a masterclass in how to strangle innovation with the very best intentions, wrapped in enough paperwork to make Kafka blush.
Welcome to New York, where the future is carefully regulated, thoroughly documented, and meaningfully reviewed – right into submission.
Founder and Managing Partner of Skarbiec Law Firm, recognized by Dziennik Gazeta Prawna as one of the best tax advisory firms in Poland (2023, 2024). Legal advisor with 19 years of experience, serving Forbes-listed entrepreneurs and innovative start-ups. One of the most frequently quoted experts on commercial and tax law in the Polish media, regularly publishing in Rzeczpospolita, Gazeta Wyborcza, and Dziennik Gazeta Prawna. Author of the publication “AI Decoding Satoshi Nakamoto. Artificial Intelligence on the Trail of Bitcoin’s Creator” and co-author of the award-winning book “Bezpieczeństwo współczesnej firmy” (Security of a Modern Company). LinkedIn profile: 17,000 followers, 4 million views per year. Awards: 4-time winner of the European Medal, Golden Statuette of the Polish Business Leader, title of “International Tax Planning Law Firm of the Year in Poland.” He specializes in strategic legal consulting, tax planning, and crisis management for business.
