Comment by tener
2 months ago
So we end up in a system in which those with money to litigate will do what they want? I'd rather have airtight laws instead.
2 months ago
So we end up in a system in which those with money to litigate will do what they want? I'd rather have airtight laws instead.
Can you point to an airtight law regarding speech that exists today - both as written and enforced? I can't.
This is a worse is better[1] situation. Specifically, I'm arguing against the MIT approach to lawmaking.
The MIT approach:
> The design must be consistent. A design is allowed to be slightly less simple and less complete to avoid inconsistency. Consistency is as important as correctness.
Thinking about laws like software terminates thought.
1. https://www.dreamsongs.com/WIB.html
That's where we are right now. Airtight laws are impossible in complex systems.
Sure, but I meant airtight as a point on a spectrum rather than absolute thing. Meaning: you should prefer laws which are both generic and unambiguous.