3 ms·

Why do you think less laws are magically better? Assuming you’re a programmer, why don’t you just write fewer lines of code? Maybe we should just have every l

Why do you think less laws are magically better? Assuming you’re a programmer, why don’t you just write fewer lines of code? Maybe we should just have every line of code automatically delete itself after a specified period of time.

lockhouse 3y ago
If a law has been effective and is still relevant it should be easy to get it renewed. Lines of code is actually a great analogy. The Linux kernel frequently removes old, irrelevant code that is poorly maintained and is no longer useful.
- lozenge 3y ago
  In my experience, many issues have been caused by removing code based on assumptions it isn't used/has no effect/has been superseded, while there aren't many issues caused by letting dead code hang around a bit.
- comte7092 3y ago
  Old laws get overwritten, edited, and removed all the time.m, after review and discussion.
  - lockhouse 3y ago
    Not often enough.
    - comte7092 3y ago
      And stale code isn’t removed often enough either.
- toast0 3y ago
  I don't know about Oregon's legislature. But other legislatures sometimes have trouble getting any work done, even the easy work. Most likely, they'd just resort to blanket renewing everything, in order to get to the real work, if it were a year that work was doable. And in years where there's no appetite for getting things done, it will probably take the whole session to get the renewals done.
- pseudalopex 3y ago
  Linux kernel maintainers remove code when convinced it is a good idea. Legislators remove code when convinced it is a good idea. Linux kernel code does not expire. Laws should not expire if the analogy is great.
some_random 3y ago
I mean, I think everyone kinda agrees that in general having less code is better. That said, a better analogy would be to imagine a world in which every program you ever push to prod, every docker container, every EC2 box, all by default were around forever. Making them automatically stop themselves is a way to keep system complexity down and make sure each component is actually, you know, doing something useful.
- comte7092 3y ago
  I definitely agree that having a simplified legal code is a good thing. What I don’t agree with is the idea that you should just slash away at it with a machete rather than cut away with a scalpel. Making changes to laws is extremely politically fraught and challenging, the real world is messy, and we need laws. For as much flak as people like to give our political system, America has succeeded for having fairly effective and good government, not in spite of it.
- kelseyfrog 3y ago
  The law is a monolith. It doesn't work like docker containers. It works like a codebase. If anything it works like a series of patches. Imagine a codebase where each commit has an expiration date. If some patches are left to expire, I think we can would be in agreement that at the very least we would have no expectation that patch application would still be successful - leaving us with textual issues. At the very worst, we have no guarantee that the resulting body of law would be consistent, or result in a consistent society. We already have potential loopholes when folks are careful with drafting laws. This is asking for exploits. There is no static analysis for political economy.
krisoft 3y ago
> Assuming you’re a programmer, why don’t you just write fewer lines of code? Oh I'm working very hard on that. Code is liability. > Maybe we should just have every line of code automatically delete itself after a specified period of time. I actually proposed that. We should just try to randomly delete lines of code and if it doesn't break any tests just commit it. And I was only half joking.

lockhouse 3y ago

If a law has been effective and is still relevant it should be easy to get it renewed. Lines of code is actually a great analogy. The Linux kernel frequently removes old, irrelevant code that is poorly maintained and is no longer useful.

lozenge 3y ago
In my experience, many issues have been caused by removing code based on assumptions it isn't used/has no effect/has been superseded, while there aren't many issues caused by letting dead code hang around a bit.
comte7092 3y ago
Old laws get overwritten, edited, and removed all the time.m, after review and discussion.
- lockhouse 3y ago
  Not often enough.
  - comte7092 3y ago
    And stale code isn’t removed often enough either.
toast0 3y ago
I don't know about Oregon's legislature. But other legislatures sometimes have trouble getting any work done, even the easy work. Most likely, they'd just resort to blanket renewing everything, in order to get to the real work, if it were a year that work was doable. And in years where there's no appetite for getting things done, it will probably take the whole session to get the renewals done.
pseudalopex 3y ago
Linux kernel maintainers remove code when convinced it is a good idea. Legislators remove code when convinced it is a good idea. Linux kernel code does not expire. Laws should not expire if the analogy is great.

some_random 3y ago

I mean, I think everyone kinda agrees that in general having less code is better. That said, a better analogy would be to imagine a world in which every program you ever push to prod, every docker container, every EC2 box, all by default were around forever. Making them automatically stop themselves is a way to keep system complexity down and make sure each component is actually, you know, doing something useful.

comte7092 3y ago
I definitely agree that having a simplified legal code is a good thing. What I don’t agree with is the idea that you should just slash away at it with a machete rather than cut away with a scalpel. Making changes to laws is extremely politically fraught and challenging, the real world is messy, and we need laws. For as much flak as people like to give our political system, America has succeeded for having fairly effective and good government, not in spite of it.
kelseyfrog 3y ago
The law is a monolith. It doesn't work like docker containers. It works like a codebase. If anything it works like a series of patches. Imagine a codebase where each commit has an expiration date. If some patches are left to expire, I think we can would be in agreement that at the very least we would have no expectation that patch application would still be successful - leaving us with textual issues. At the very worst, we have no guarantee that the resulting body of law would be consistent, or result in a consistent society. We already have potential loopholes when folks are careful with drafting laws. This is asking for exploits. There is no static analysis for political economy.

krisoft 3y ago

> Assuming you’re a programmer, why don’t you just write fewer lines of code? Oh I'm working very hard on that. Code is liability. > Maybe we should just have every line of code automatically delete itself after a specified period of time. I actually proposed that. We should just try to randomly delete lines of code and if it doesn't break any tests just commit it. And I was only half joking.