Such as "No hate speech".
388 karma · joined November 10, 2010
I disagree, lawyers would have no work then. Laws are not as specific as you would think they are and it is to provide a diverse gamut of powers and broad discretion in their application.
For example, the first amendment does not offer an unlimited right to say what you want, when you want, and however you want. At what point does said speech become prohibited hate speech, inciting violence, verbal assault, defamation etc...?
There is plenty evidence of people exercising free speech such as wearing cuss words on shirts and their speech being stifled by police through intimidation and arrests. Most famously Cohen v California and for example more recently Wood v Eubanks (25 F. 4th 414 - Court of Appeals, 6th Circuit 2022) with very similar facts to Cohen v California.
Here is another one "Battery is an unlawful application of force directly or indirectly upon another person or their personal belongings, causing bodily injury or offensive contact." I go onto the bus and my shoulder hits the shoulder of another passenger. I did not have consent to touch them and they are upset by the contact / found it offensive. Am I guilty of battery?
In the test "No vehicle sin the park" there is no ambiguity that an ambulance is a vehicle, but clearly 1/3 of people don't think it breaks the rule, presumably largely because it's for an emergency purpose despite the rule not having an exemption for such a scenario. Neither would a rule that says "no hate speech". What is hate speech? Would speech stating "I hate..." Nazi's or a genocidal leader or regime be hate speech? So what are the exemptions, what are the discretions? How do we define things?
What about support for LGTBQIA+? Some countries only recently have become more amenable to these groups, but plenty of jurisdictions and cultures are still very much opposed to them. Is homophobia hate speech? What is transphobic speech? Is stating there are only two genders transphobic?
The same could be said about support for Ukraine which is positive in the Western world but would be illegal in Russia. But then, what about Taiwan and it's disputed status with respect to China? What about other contested borders and lands?
The fact that even when there is no ambiguity people don't entirely agree whether a simple rule is broken is entirely the point of the exercise. And now, you expect platforms and countries to exercise those rules and laws when evidently people can't even agree on a simple rule.
It will also be interesting how the outward display will display the "bad" eye input including missing eyes, lazy eyes, nystagmus, etc...
The task effectively also requires a case and paragraph impact meter which do exist in some law databases to one extend or another, effectively weighing how subsequent rulings consider, weight, and follow past cases, caveats, exceptions, and outright considering past rulings as bad law.
Then you have the issue of changing laws and the impact these may have on past cases as they may change the test and requirements needed to be considered and even much new case law needed to be developed to interpret the new legislation. So the model would need to have a historical knowledge of the law and how it was applied.
You would also need to feed it relevant surrounding information that may aid in interpreting said law. In the US, clearly the founding father's opinions and beliefs appear to play a significant part on the currently more originalist interpretative school of thought.
In the UK/Australia for example readings in parliament and even the underpinning reports that prompted the change in legislation may be considered where there is ambiguity in order to interpret legislation. Australian legislation nowadays also tends to incorporate an objective of the legislation and a section that says that where ambiguity exists to interpret it in a way that would further the objectives of the legislation.
So, it's really not a trivial problem.
> Two pounds of feathers are heavier than a pound of bricks. The weight of the feathers is twice as much as the bricks, even though they may take up more space and seem lighter due to their lower density.
I understand recent antibiotic use such as past 12-24 months, but never?
I think grading matrixes would be well served it they assess the writing ability of the person. That is, how well can they justify their opinion with quotes and sources, rather than what the interpretation outcome itself.
Coming prepared has saved me far more time that rocking up just on time and then trying to set it up only for windows to update. People also learn that my meetings matter because they have a purpose and we get right on it, saving up on people showing late etc...
Investing those 15 minutes of my time really goes a long way for everyone else which benefits me too.
If you can go from 30000 to 1000 just by changing to good enough autonomous cars that's a change worth doing. Then you can look at improving it to 0 and encourage that process if not through insurance liability processes through regulations that require ongoing improvement in autonomous safety.