I would push further because the difference is essential and massive. Human legal systems do not have 'wiggle room'. They are living, breathing bodies open to i

I would push further because the difference is essential and massive. Human legal systems do not have 'wiggle room'. They are living, breathing bodies open to interpretation and change. In fact, radical change and radical interpretation. There are times where laws have been strict (think of the US three strikes rule, or a US 90s favorite, the singaporean caning rule for littering) however the more rigid the set of rules the more authoritarian a system is assumed to be and generally authoritarianism is assumed to not be favorable. Alternately, the rule of law means equality in the eyes of the law. Each and every person should be subject to the same rules, despite the variation in interpretation making for a variety of outcomes. Algorithms lack this and we're seeing the consequences in everything from mundane customer service interactions to the chinese social credit system