4 ms·

In the same way that Markdown compiles to HTML which is then interpreted by web browsers into pixels on a screen, I find it fascinating to consider the logical

by btown 6y ago

In the same way that Markdown compiles to HTML which is then interpreted by web browsers into pixels on a screen, I find it fascinating to consider the logical next step: the runtime environment in which "legal code" runs. A contract is really a function of (world state) -> (booleans for parties in breach), and lawyers excel at traversing the function space of possible contracts based on simulations of possible world states, making them optimizers over those function spaces. Their "speculative execution" and ability to cull parts of that search space are based on having efficient caches of case law; we literally train lawyers to be optimal caches by having them take bar examinations, because even with databases at these professionals' fingertips, the latency with which they can simulate contract space given novel information (in trial, in live conversations with clients) is a core competency of the profession. I wonder if some of the tooling and philosophies being developed in the machine learning world can be applied to great effect in this context...

willio58 6y ago
Do it with Ethereum. Have the U.S. government create the smart contracts. What's stopping this now?
- GavinMcG 6y ago
  Because literally the only step that's been taken in that direction is that Ethereum exists?
- qznc 6y ago
  Who said anything about blockchain? It is one thing to formalize contracts as functions. Also formalizing the world state is a much harder problem and Ethereum tries to solve it by declaring the blockchain "the world". This is the harder problem as you can observe in courts where nearly all the discussion is about the world state. For an example, the question might be "murder" vs "manslaughter". Was there malice? This is about the world state. Once that is decided, the function to determine the sentence is relatively quick to compute.
- crooked-v 6y ago
  > What's stopping this now? Well, to start with, a judge who decides that part of your contract is invalid for one reason or another isn't going to care about your claims that it's impossible to alter because blockchain.
- lawtalkinghuman 6y ago
  If you can come up with a function that can determine whether or not someone's behaviour is "reasonable" or not, you might be on to something. Oh yeah, that someone might be a person, a corporation, or a government, and the standard of reasonableness will depend on what exactly it is they're doing.
benrbray 6y ago
You might be interested in Merigoux et al 2021, "A Modern Compiler for the French Tax Code" [1]! [1]: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2011.07966.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/2011.07966.pdf
- pella 6y ago
  --> https://github.com/MLanguage/mlang https://github.com/MLanguage/mlang "Compiler for the M language, used to compute the income tax of French taxpayers"
davros 6y ago
I watched a project where the starting idea was to make and IDE for lawyers, applying the many learnings from modern IDEs including autocompletion, structure the document like code, etc. The main challenge was to get lawyers to adopt and move away from MS word. It ended up applying that approach to tools and document management for lawyers: https://tryprose.com/home https://tryprose.com/home
mjthompson 6y ago
Breach of contract claims, beyond the most simple scenarios, often involve difficult normative questions. It's unlikely a simple dispute capable of being resolved by a computer would wind up going to trial. It would be settled or be the subject of summary judgment. Sure, you might have word state -> boolean in a simple scenario. But what if the party alleges the contract, or a term, is void or unenforceable because of the existence of a vitiating factor? What if there are two competing interpretations of a term which depend upon considerations such as the purpose of the agreement? It would be a very difficult task asking someone to agree to a contract which requires no value judgements. Even more so in the Nordic countries where such agreements are governed through a lens of 'good faith'. We then wind up making value judgements, weighing the benefits of holding parties to a bargain capable of being determined objectively, on the one hand, and the elusive and complex notion of 'fairness' on the other. We are then well and truly outside the boundaries of the capabilities of contemporary thinking machines. Taxation is an area of back end law where lawyers should be worried about automation.
woliveirajr 6y ago
Some of us are graduated in Laws and have Master/PhD in computational forensics, language interpretation Simply getting the context of some words make a whole difference. And that just to extract the verdict. Language and humans can do many things that, sometimes, go long away from logic...

by btown 6y ago

willio58 6y ago

Do it with Ethereum. Have the U.S. government create the smart contracts. What's stopping this now?

GavinMcG 6y ago
Because literally the only step that's been taken in that direction is that Ethereum exists?
qznc 6y ago
Who said anything about blockchain? It is one thing to formalize contracts as functions. Also formalizing the world state is a much harder problem and Ethereum tries to solve it by declaring the blockchain "the world". This is the harder problem as you can observe in courts where nearly all the discussion is about the world state. For an example, the question might be "murder" vs "manslaughter". Was there malice? This is about the world state. Once that is decided, the function to determine the sentence is relatively quick to compute.
crooked-v 6y ago
> What's stopping this now? Well, to start with, a judge who decides that part of your contract is invalid for one reason or another isn't going to care about your claims that it's impossible to alter because blockchain.
lawtalkinghuman 6y ago
If you can come up with a function that can determine whether or not someone's behaviour is "reasonable" or not, you might be on to something. Oh yeah, that someone might be a person, a corporation, or a government, and the standard of reasonableness will depend on what exactly it is they're doing.

benrbray 6y ago

You might be interested in Merigoux et al 2021, "A Modern Compiler for the French Tax Code" [1]! [1]: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2011.07966.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/2011.07966.pdf

pella 6y ago
--> https://github.com/MLanguage/mlang https://github.com/MLanguage/mlang "Compiler for the M language, used to compute the income tax of French taxpayers"

davros 6y ago

I watched a project where the starting idea was to make and IDE for lawyers, applying the many learnings from modern IDEs including autocompletion, structure the document like code, etc. The main challenge was to get lawyers to adopt and move away from MS word. It ended up applying that approach to tools and document management for lawyers: https://tryprose.com/home https://tryprose.com/home

mjthompson 6y ago

Breach of contract claims, beyond the most simple scenarios, often involve difficult normative questions. It's unlikely a simple dispute capable of being resolved by a computer would wind up going to trial. It would be settled or be the subject of summary judgment. Sure, you might have word state -> boolean in a simple scenario. But what if the party alleges the contract, or a term, is void or unenforceable because of the existence of a vitiating factor? What if there are two competing interpretations of a term which depend upon considerations such as the purpose of the agreement? It would be a very difficult task asking someone to agree to a contract which requires no value judgements. Even more so in the Nordic countries where such agreements are governed through a lens of 'good faith'. We then wind up making value judgements, weighing the benefits of holding parties to a bargain capable of being determined objectively, on the one hand, and the elusive and complex notion of 'fairness' on the other. We are then well and truly outside the boundaries of the capabilities of contemporary thinking machines. Taxation is an area of back end law where lawyers should be worried about automation.

woliveirajr 6y ago

Some of us are graduated in Laws and have Master/PhD in computational forensics, language interpretation Simply getting the context of some words make a whole difference. And that just to extract the verdict. Language and humans can do many things that, sometimes, go long away from logic...