I am seriously interested in more information about this approach. I think that right now, there are two modern systems of law: Roman-derived law and English-derived, or “common” law. Sharia law might count as a close runner-up. I think Halacha is well-developed, but not widely-enforced, so I would not count it as a major modern legal system. With that said, and admitting I don’t know much about civil law or the religious laws, my impression is that all the above are similarly complicated, and have been for centuries. I am in doubt that human behavior and its ambiguities could be simplified by being encoded in Python. I think it’s a really, really hard problem, at least as long as humans remain as unpredictable as they do.
I am seriously interested in more information about this approach. I think that right now, there are two modern systems of law: Roman-derived law and English-derived, or “common” law. Sharia law might count as a close runner-up. I think Halacha is well-developed, but not widely-enforced, so I would not count it as a major modern legal system.
David Friedman has taught a course in “Legal Systems Very Different From Ours” in both 2008 and 2010. See these course pages: [1][2]
I am seriously interested in more information about this approach. I think that right now, there are two modern systems of law: Roman-derived law and English-derived, or “common” law. Sharia law might count as a close runner-up. I think Halacha is well-developed, but not widely-enforced, so I would not count it as a major modern legal system. With that said, and admitting I don’t know much about civil law or the religious laws, my impression is that all the above are similarly complicated, and have been for centuries. I am in doubt that human behavior and its ambiguities could be simplified by being encoded in Python. I think it’s a really, really hard problem, at least as long as humans remain as unpredictable as they do.
Off-topic: Why does everyone on lesswrong say Python when they need to mention a programming language?
Rule 46b:: I will not turn my programming language into a snake. It never helps.
It has a very high ease of learning to usefulness ratio?
edit: It seems to come highly recommended as a first programming language (certainly it was such to me).
Do you mean a high usefulness to difficulty of learning ratio?
Atari BASIC had a nearly infinite ease of learning to usefulness ratio. :)
Right.
Python is my first (and currently only) programming language. It’s easy to read, easy to learn, and useful.
Python code is also reasonably easy to read. It’s sometimes called executable pseudocode.
I did a Google duel—and it appears that “Java” beats “Python” for mentions around here.
I don’t get it either I’m more of a C guy.
David Friedman has taught a course in “Legal Systems Very Different From Ours” in both 2008 and 2010. See these course pages: [1] [2]