30 ms·

Hackers are specifically interested in exploring/exploiting the way human nature makes all machines vulnerable. IE taking a reasonably well-defined system of ru

Hackers are specifically interested in exploring/exploiting the way human nature makes all machines vulnerable. IE taking a reasonably well-defined system of rules built with good intentions and using them for something entirely unintended. In this sense, law is similar to code, but far easier to exploit.

shadowgovt 6y ago
> In this sense, law is similar to code, but far easier to exploit. I see way too few computer engineer criminal masterminds to accept this hypothesis at face value. ;)
- shredprez 6y ago
  A better measuring stick might be lawyers and judges regularly applying the law in inconsistent ways.
  - toomuchtodo 6y ago
    Police discretion is a great example imho. Watch everywhere in your day to day as laws are applied based on a subjective real time evaluation of the situation.
    - shakezula 6y ago
      And most cops barely even know the laws themselves. There have been multiple times I’ve heard cops incorrectly cite state laws.
  - ctrl-j 6y ago
    The biggest thing I've learned from good lawyers, is that with the law - there's always an appeal, a different interpretation, and a challenge or request for exemption from a rule. Applying to be a lawyer in and of itself can be a process of figuring out the correct paperwork to fill out and asking for a special exemption on a piece of missing information or a missed deadline.
- teawrecks 6y ago
  They're just that good ;)
- fgonzag 6y ago
  tax loopholes, crazy defense strategies, corporations doing blatantly illegal things (or that should be illegal) and getting by on technicalities. All of them are essentially legal system hacking.
cortesoft 6y ago
> In this sense, law is similar to code, but far easier to exploit. I would disagree. I feel like programmers see logical contradictions or loop holes in laws and think that if they make the argument in court, the court will segfault and they will go free. In reality, courts use more inductive reasoning than computers, and aren't as easily tricked.
- sgift 6y ago
  Courts are easily tricked, the hacks needed are just different from what most programmers assume them to be. The whole job of lawyers is hacking the court to get a more favorable outcome. If this wasn't true it wouldn't matter which lawyer you have since the court would always interpret law in exactly the same way.
  - JumpCrisscross 6y ago
    > If this wasn't true it wouldn't matter which lawyer you have since the court would always interpret law in exactly the same way Have you ever litigated? Litigation isn’t about “hacking” the court. If that’s how a lawyer is selling themselves, you’re being taken for a ride. Cases are about resolving novel ambiguities in the law. The vast majority of disputes never make it to court. The two sides lawyer up and one of them is advised that based on the facts the precedent is in the opponent’s favor. As such, settlement is advisable. In a minority of cases, precedent is mixed or not applicable—the facts and circumstances are truly novel with respect to the law. Given the law is finite and reality is infinite, this happens more often than you’d think. Lawyers thus argue how the law should be extended. Remember, case law is law in common law countries. Judges opinions aren’t interpretations per se, but acts of rule making.
    - zbyte64 6y ago
      Courts are made up of humans. Good lawyers put time into jury and judge/jurisdiction selection. Good firms hire former court staffers that know the judges presiding over the case. It's not meant to be easy to game the courts because it's a privilege.

shadowgovt 6y ago

> In this sense, law is similar to code, but far easier to exploit. I see way too few computer engineer criminal masterminds to accept this hypothesis at face value. ;)

shredprez 6y ago
A better measuring stick might be lawyers and judges regularly applying the law in inconsistent ways.
- toomuchtodo 6y ago
  Police discretion is a great example imho. Watch everywhere in your day to day as laws are applied based on a subjective real time evaluation of the situation.
  - shakezula 6y ago
    And most cops barely even know the laws themselves. There have been multiple times I’ve heard cops incorrectly cite state laws.
- ctrl-j 6y ago
  The biggest thing I've learned from good lawyers, is that with the law - there's always an appeal, a different interpretation, and a challenge or request for exemption from a rule. Applying to be a lawyer in and of itself can be a process of figuring out the correct paperwork to fill out and asking for a special exemption on a piece of missing information or a missed deadline.
teawrecks 6y ago
They're just that good ;)
fgonzag 6y ago
tax loopholes, crazy defense strategies, corporations doing blatantly illegal things (or that should be illegal) and getting by on technicalities. All of them are essentially legal system hacking.

cortesoft 6y ago

> In this sense, law is similar to code, but far easier to exploit. I would disagree. I feel like programmers see logical contradictions or loop holes in laws and think that if they make the argument in court, the court will segfault and they will go free. In reality, courts use more inductive reasoning than computers, and aren't as easily tricked.

sgift 6y ago
Courts are easily tricked, the hacks needed are just different from what most programmers assume them to be. The whole job of lawyers is hacking the court to get a more favorable outcome. If this wasn't true it wouldn't matter which lawyer you have since the court would always interpret law in exactly the same way.
- JumpCrisscross 6y ago
  > If this wasn't true it wouldn't matter which lawyer you have since the court would always interpret law in exactly the same way Have you ever litigated? Litigation isn’t about “hacking” the court. If that’s how a lawyer is selling themselves, you’re being taken for a ride. Cases are about resolving novel ambiguities in the law. The vast majority of disputes never make it to court. The two sides lawyer up and one of them is advised that based on the facts the precedent is in the opponent’s favor. As such, settlement is advisable. In a minority of cases, precedent is mixed or not applicable—the facts and circumstances are truly novel with respect to the law. Given the law is finite and reality is infinite, this happens more often than you’d think. Lawyers thus argue how the law should be extended. Remember, case law is law in common law countries. Judges opinions aren’t interpretations per se, but acts of rule making.
  - zbyte64 6y ago
    Courts are made up of humans. Good lawyers put time into jury and judge/jurisdiction selection. Good firms hire former court staffers that know the judges presiding over the case. It's not meant to be easy to game the courts because it's a privilege.