4 ms·
Laws need to hit the right amount of vague in order to be practical. Courts and legal traditions will fill in the gaps (especially in a precedence heavy system
by Vespasian 5y ago
Laws need to hit the right amount of vague in order to be practical.
Courts and legal traditions will fill in the gaps (especially in a precedence heavy system like the US one).
It wouldn't surprise me if there isn't already a standard interpretation for "general computing device".
- judge2020 5y ago> general purpose computing device There really isn't, at least in the US Code. If there was and this law was referring to it, it would refer to it "as defined by U.S.C <number>". This discussion from a year ago illustrates my point; this bill is PR fluff and the one they actually discuss putting into law will have to be more specific https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24191018 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24191018