Comment by dathinab

I'm not speaking about perfect enforcement.

But about that law, in difference to what movies love to pretend, is not about clever word tricks and nit-picking formulations.

(In court it still can be about clever arguing, including nit picking arguments if necessary.)

But code _is_ about nit picking formulations at least if we ignore documentation, naming conventions etc. but lock solely at what the code does.

Code is meant to be precise.

Law is meant to be only as precise as necessary but no more then that. Or you could say it's meant to be as imprecise as viable.

Code is about the specific case (in general).

Law is about the generic case (in general), avoiding specific cases where possible.

Code is made for machines to consume.

Law is meant to be consumed with ambiguous defined context of the situations in (human) .

This is so deeply rooted in law that I would argue it's (in general, with exceptions) not possible to translate any current laws to code without accidentally changing their meaning in a lot of subtle but meaningful cases.