4 ms·
Laws resemble computer programs in many ways, so I suppose it is only natural that computers be made to interpret them.
by TazeTSchnitzel 10y ago
Laws resemble computer programs in many ways, so I suppose it is only natural that computers be made to interpret them.
- minikites 10y agoThe edge cases for people under such laws are much more serious than most computer edge cases.
- TazeTSchnitzel 10y agoIndeed. That's probably why in some jurisdictions, decisions are not allowed to be blindly made by computers exclusively.
- Erik816 10y agoThe edge cases are also exactly when lawyers get involved. If the law is clear, there's not much work for a lawyer to do (you plead guilty, you settle the case, you don't sue in the first place, etc.). Dealing with ambiguity is the main skill of a lawyer.
- lukasm 10y agoThe problem is intent and context. Reckless driving vs Manslaughter.
- Eridrus 10y agoStatic analysis is far from a solved problem, so I do the think that's a useful analogy for considering whether we can automate some analysis :)
- amelius 10y agoSome of my friends who are now lawyers were really bad at math in high-school, so I'm not sure that equating law to computer programs is how it works in practice.
- epmaybe 10y agoTo be fair, computer programming itself doesn't really require a lot of math knowledge. Conceptual understanding of the programs does. But Logic is something that is basically required in both fields, so it's natural to see some similarities.
- tomc1985 10y agoIt's not the math, it's logic. I see this parallel too -- legalese is incredibly dense because it is very specific, and its unreadability stems from (our) natural languages' disinclination towards specificity