In a recent public announcement and action plan, the Adams administration unveiled its strategy for addressing the growing presence of artificial intelligence (AI) in everyday life and government. This issue may have seemed farcical just a few decades ago, but now New York City has an opportunity to lead the nation in developing sensible local policies on AI. While AI is often portrayed as either an apocalyptic scourge or a miraculous savior, the reality is that the technologies encompassed by AI are not yet advanced enough to fulfill either extreme. We currently lack what's known as artificial general intelligence, which could autonomously cure diseases or threaten our existence like Skynet. Instead, what we have are tools that can mimic certain aspects of human cognition, understanding, and creativity, but fall short of total replication. Of course, like any tool, AI can be used responsibly or misused. On one hand, AI can assist public universities in supporting and intervening with at-risk students to prevent dropout rates. On the other hand, it can perpetuate institutional racism in the criminal justice system by wrongly tagging Black individuals as high-risk for crime. The key differentiators between these applications lie in having clear regulations, closely monitoring outcomes, and conducting frequent audits.

That's why it's crucial that Mayor Adams, who has openly embraced technology (at times to our chagrin), is pushing for regulation, external advisement, and clear frameworks for the use of AI. He deserves credit for actively trying to establish a responsible and rational approach to managing learning machines. While the media has focused on some of the more eccentric use cases mentioned by the mayor, such as the creation of voice-replicating programs for multilingual robocalls, the majority of the action plan actually revolves around developing citywide guidelines, implementing reporting procedures, instituting best practices, engaging with the public, and educating the city's workforce about the potential opportunities and pitfalls of AI. We believe that the regulation-focused structure of this plan signifies a commitment to taking AI seriously, avoiding the traps of hype while acknowledging its potential benefits when deployed appropriately. Equally important to note is the timing of this plan, as it is being introduced while many AI applications are still hypothetical or in their infancy. In the past, public tech regulation has often been reactive, with policies attempting to rein in developments that have already become widespread (as seen with the city's effort to establish ride-hail frameworks after Uber and Lyft had already disrupted the taxi market). It is responsible to take proactive measures before the full effects of AI are unleashed. This moment is pivotal and will determine whether AI becomes a threat or a boon to the city, and this plan sets a promising course forward. We will closely monitor the progress made.