I think that "ignorance of the law is no protection from breaking it" is desirable. Otherwise it would be on everybody's best interest not to know the law. Of

I think that "ignorance of the law is no protection from breaking it" is desirable. Otherwise it would be on everybody's best interest not to know the law. Of course, it is also desirable for a lay person to be able to know the full extent of the law. Maybe we should make a rule about the maximum amount of information that can be encoded in our legal system. Such as, you can only get n bits of information, for some reasonable n. Say the same amounts of bits that takes to encode Romeo and Juliet. Once they are all used up, it would not be possible to mandate more things unless some previous mandates are removed. We would still need codes and regulations, though, and we could assign m new bits to each of them. With the rule that no role should require one to be aware of more than k codes and regulations. For the smallest possible k. So the cost of knowing (albeit not necessarily understanding) the law would be n + mk. Which seems sensible enough.