|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 23 2012 @ 02:12 PM EDT |
I think you have it backwards:
The technology is more complex, but the law is much more complicated.
Technology, while appearing complicated, can be broken down into simple systems
that can be explained simply (even if that requires several iterations through
levels of complexity). That makes it complex.
The latter, while sometimes appearing simple (especially to non-experts) on the
surface, is very complicated both in its text and its application. It cannot
always be broken down into simple systems that can be explained simply because
not all of them are rational, and they overlap in often irrational ways. The
law of unintended consequences wreaks havoc on simplifying the law into
understandable systems. This makes it complicated.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 23 2012 @ 08:43 PM EDT |
This raises an interesting point. We have a judge to decide matters of law
because they are too complex for a mere layman to understand. Why don't we have
the same approach to technical issues? Is there something about the law that
makes its form of complexity different to other fields that have complexity?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: RMAC9.5 on Wednesday, May 23 2012 @ 09:02 PM EDT |
While modern technology is complex, scientists and engineers, its
practitioners, try to make it simple to use: because this is how they
win.
Technology that is too complicated doesn't
sell.
Law and justice, which should be simple because its
fundamentals (e.g. Do unto others ...) are simple , is complex because its
practitioners, legislators, lawyers, and judges, make it complicated to use:
because this is how they win. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
