Op-ed: Massachusetts’ AI balancing act – Sentinel and Enterprise

Well, well, well. The Massachusetts House has pulled a "strict AI safety bill" because, brace yourselves, it might "impact innovation." As if the brief history of tech regulation has taught us anything other than that the word "innovation" is the get-out-of-jail-free card for every industry that wants to keep its powder dry. Meanwhile, the state Senate, never one to be outdone in the art of doing nothing efficiently, has suggested forming a commission to study the matter. A commission! Because nothing inspires confidence in our ability to manage the most transformative technology since fire quite like a roomful of people deciding to think about thinking about it.

The op-ed frames this as a "balancing act," which is generous. What it actually is, is a textbook case of regulatory paralysis dressed up as prudence. The House flinched under pressure from industry lobbyists (presumably) and the Senate responded with the political equivalent of a "think about it" — a commission to study regulations that will likely produce a report that gets shelved in time for the next legislative session. Meanwhile, AI companies continue to ship models with capabilities that outpace any conceivable guardrail, but hey, at least we're studying the issue.

Call me cynical, but I suspect the commission will have plenty of time to deliberate, because by the time it issues its recommendations, the AI landscape will have moved on so dramatically that its findings will be quaintly outdated. The tweet-sized takeaway: Massachusetts has decided that the best way to handle AI is to form a committee. A committee. In 2026. Cheers to progress.