"...slime of a new bureaucracy." -- Franz Kafka
What is the maximum number of laws and regulations possible in a human society before any action becomes impossible?
How many new laws and regulations are added per year? Do they increase as a arithmetical or geometric rate?
Conversely, how close are we to the point where it is the best policy to assume every action is forbidden unless explicitly permitted?
At some point, a software agent that can check the legislation in real time against your actions would be a useful app for every prudent person. And likewise, on that could file applications and permits without delay would also be useful.
Consider the advantages of robotic arbitrage, high-speed robotic lawyers may also prove beneficial.
I'm surprised that science fiction missed this.
EDIT: I keep thinking of the repeated refrain from Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas... "As your attorney, I advise..." but spoken in one of those creepy high-end synthesized voices.
Showing posts with label tin foil hat. Show all posts
Showing posts with label tin foil hat. Show all posts
Numeric derangements
I started the morning by writing a sharp screed on the two kinds of numbers, but have managed to convince myself it sounds dangerously like a tinfoil hat talking. So I'm pressing DEL on the whole thing, beyond this remark:
There are numbers for counting, and a different kind of numbers for measuring. Superficially they are similar, but so are octopi and squid *.
I always assumed that using measuring-type numbers for arrays and pointers in C rather than counting-type numbers was an example of the original programmers just not thinking hard enough about the problem.
The subtleties of numeric conversions are often ignored : consider how many smart people think that 0.9999...infinity !=1 .
But while tooling around the Net, I found this which has changed my opinion. They did think about it, they just picked the wrong type of numbers.
I'd like to say its moot, and I'll never forget that arrays start in position 0, but hey, I would have said that about initializing my variables, too. At least until yesterday.
* And most days I'd rather fight the former rather than the latter, but I'll eat either.
There are numbers for counting, and a different kind of numbers for measuring. Superficially they are similar, but so are octopi and squid *.
I always assumed that using measuring-type numbers for arrays and pointers in C rather than counting-type numbers was an example of the original programmers just not thinking hard enough about the problem.
The subtleties of numeric conversions are often ignored : consider how many smart people think that 0.9999...infinity !=1 .
But while tooling around the Net, I found this which has changed my opinion. They did think about it, they just picked the wrong type of numbers.
I'd like to say its moot, and I'll never forget that arrays start in position 0, but hey, I would have said that about initializing my variables, too. At least until yesterday.
* And most days I'd rather fight the former rather than the latter, but I'll eat either.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
