6 ms·

Technicalities are part have having a rule of law. The legislature (or at the formation of a governmental system) is where the issues get debated and the law de

by ISL 7y ago

Technicalities are part have having a rule of law. The legislature (or at the formation of a governmental system) is where the issues get debated and the law determined.

3fe9a03ccd14ca5 7y ago
And a local government that loves to create laws will always be inundated with lawsuits related to their technicalities.
mikepurvis 7y ago
Surely that's the role of the courts? The legislature is there to provide broad guidance in the form of laws; it's judges and juries who agonize over these details and enshrine them in case law.
- CryptoBanker 7y ago
  Studies have shown time and time again that the courts treat the wealthy and the poor differently...
  - 0-9 7y ago
    The law, in its majestic equality, allows the poor as well as the rich to exclude the public from their private beach compounds.
  - mikepurvis 7y ago
    Not arguing that the arrangement is just or fair, only about what the intent of it is.
rcMgD2BwE72F 7y ago
What about information asymmetry that makes it easy for some to manage these technicalities? One billionaire can easily have a full-time team working for him to defend his case, and also buy politicians to do the same. In an oligarchy, technicalities can easily become tools of power.
CharlesColeman 7y ago
> Technicalities are part have having a rule of law. The legislature (or at the formation of a governmental system) is where the issues get debated and the law determined. I think there are valid philosophical differences that significantly affect how the system interprets technicalities. I understand the US takes an approach that's much like code: specify everything precisely in great detail, and technicalities and loopholes can be exploited to subvert the original intent of the law. I may be mistaken on this, but understand the EU tends to laws that specify broader principles, so technicalities and loopholes aren't as useful. The US approach leads to more precise and consistent application, at the expense of flexibility and achieving the original purpose of the law easier to subvert or avoid. The EU approach leads to less consistent application in corner cases, but is more flexible and harder to subvert the original purpose. Apologies if I got the EU case wrong, please correct me if I did. Personally I wish the US tended more towards the EU approach: so in this case if California law mandates public beach access, Khosla needs to provide it somehow, and can't weasel out of it on a technicality.
- jdsully 7y ago
  The legal philosophy is actually the opposite. Common Law is heavily based upon precedent and what the norms of the community are to “fill in the gaps”. The vast majority of what goes into a decision is this historical case law. The actual legal text is more of a framework than exhaustive guide. Much of Europe works with civil law where everything is expected to be codified beforehand. Past cases have little bearing on how a new one will be decided.
  - basch 7y ago
    In theory, civil law can still be technical or principled. It's a set of instructions used to make a decision. The interpreter then decides, maybe based on law maybe based on precedent, or a mix.
    - beerandt 7y ago
      >>The US approach leads to more precise and consistent Technical and principled? Yes Precise? If that particular scenario has been anticipated and coded for, yes. Consistent? No
seph-reed 7y ago
In other words: Justice depends on poorly written, easily hacked code with almost no amount of security team or patching, and also the security team is paid off.
- gorgoiler 7y ago
  A high-quality, moral, independent, and often compassionate judiciary is certainly a requirement for anything like common law to work.
outside1234 7y ago
Technicalities are the part of the law that are exploited by the megarich.
cryptica 7y ago
But laws based on historical technicalities tend to lose sight of the big picture around which laws were originally designed. Initially, access was completely free, then the government allowed one owner to collect parking fees from visitors, and now they try to ban all public access outright... Then before you know it, in line with historical technical trends, they will put us all in cages and force us to work for free. The law is not about technicalities at all, that's BS. The law is irrational; it's all about feelings. It should reflect how the average person feels about things. That's why criminal court cases have a jury instead of a computer to decide on the verdict.

by ISL 7y ago

Technicalities are part have having a rule of law. The legislature (or at the formation of a governmental system) is where the issues get debated and the law determined.

3fe9a03ccd14ca5 7y ago

And a local government that loves to create laws will always be inundated with lawsuits related to their technicalities.

mikepurvis 7y ago

Surely that's the role of the courts? The legislature is there to provide broad guidance in the form of laws; it's judges and juries who agonize over these details and enshrine them in case law.

CryptoBanker 7y ago
Studies have shown time and time again that the courts treat the wealthy and the poor differently...
- 0-9 7y ago
  The law, in its majestic equality, allows the poor as well as the rich to exclude the public from their private beach compounds.
- mikepurvis 7y ago
  Not arguing that the arrangement is just or fair, only about what the intent of it is.

rcMgD2BwE72F 7y ago

What about information asymmetry that makes it easy for some to manage these technicalities? One billionaire can easily have a full-time team working for him to defend his case, and also buy politicians to do the same. In an oligarchy, technicalities can easily become tools of power.

CharlesColeman 7y ago

> Technicalities are part have having a rule of law. The legislature (or at the formation of a governmental system) is where the issues get debated and the law determined. I think there are valid philosophical differences that significantly affect how the system interprets technicalities. I understand the US takes an approach that's much like code: specify everything precisely in great detail, and technicalities and loopholes can be exploited to subvert the original intent of the law. I may be mistaken on this, but understand the EU tends to laws that specify broader principles, so technicalities and loopholes aren't as useful. The US approach leads to more precise and consistent application, at the expense of flexibility and achieving the original purpose of the law easier to subvert or avoid. The EU approach leads to less consistent application in corner cases, but is more flexible and harder to subvert the original purpose. Apologies if I got the EU case wrong, please correct me if I did. Personally I wish the US tended more towards the EU approach: so in this case if California law mandates public beach access, Khosla needs to provide it somehow, and can't weasel out of it on a technicality.

jdsully 7y ago
The legal philosophy is actually the opposite. Common Law is heavily based upon precedent and what the norms of the community are to “fill in the gaps”. The vast majority of what goes into a decision is this historical case law. The actual legal text is more of a framework than exhaustive guide. Much of Europe works with civil law where everything is expected to be codified beforehand. Past cases have little bearing on how a new one will be decided.
- basch 7y ago
  In theory, civil law can still be technical or principled. It's a set of instructions used to make a decision. The interpreter then decides, maybe based on law maybe based on precedent, or a mix.
  - beerandt 7y ago
    >>The US approach leads to more precise and consistent Technical and principled? Yes Precise? If that particular scenario has been anticipated and coded for, yes. Consistent? No

seph-reed 7y ago

In other words: Justice depends on poorly written, easily hacked code with almost no amount of security team or patching, and also the security team is paid off.

gorgoiler 7y ago
A high-quality, moral, independent, and often compassionate judiciary is certainly a requirement for anything like common law to work.

outside1234 7y ago

Technicalities are the part of the law that are exploited by the megarich.

cryptica 7y ago

But laws based on historical technicalities tend to lose sight of the big picture around which laws were originally designed. Initially, access was completely free, then the government allowed one owner to collect parking fees from visitors, and now they try to ban all public access outright... Then before you know it, in line with historical technical trends, they will put us all in cages and force us to work for free. The law is not about technicalities at all, that's BS. The law is irrational; it's all about feelings. It should reflect how the average person feels about things. That's why criminal court cases have a jury instead of a computer to decide on the verdict.