Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Law for Computer Scientists (2020)

lawforcomputerscientists.pubpub.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 57 posts

Re: Law for Computer Scientists (2020)

#11

Post by gamblor956 »

fragmede wrote: post #8
syndicatedjelly wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The typical lawyer knows more about computers and programming, than a typical programmer knows about the law. I think this is the case for most fields with respect to programming.

What type of law and what type of programming? Everyone has to be aware of computers these days, but that doesn't make them know anything about programming. Meanwhile, in between traffic laws, financial laws (taxes, particularly), employment law, invention patent laws, maybe real estate/permitting laws, a programmer and any person in society needs to have some knowledge of the law to exist more than a lawyer needs to…

Generally, what the average programmer "knows" about the law is the equivalent to what the average lawyer "knows" about programming: the superficial, easy stuff that you can pick up without any actual training or effort.

Re: Law for Computer Scientists (2020)

#12

Post by 1propionyl »

syndicatedjelly wrote: post #4
nkmnz wrote: post #2

What about the opposite? Computer Science for lawyers?

The typical lawyer knows more about computers and programming, than a typical programmer knows about the law. I think this is the case for most fields with respect to programming.

I'm not sure about that. But I would say:

The typical programmer thinks they know far more about the law, than a typical lawyer thinks they know about programming.

Re: Law for Computer Scientists (2020)

#13

Post by t8sr »

genneth wrote: post #10

This is "law" from an European (EU) perspective. The foundations differ in English and US law. I've always thought it would be interesting to compare them in the same way computer scientists compare the design choices in different operating systems. At the top level the same outcomes are desirable, but the lower levels and choices of abstractions are different.

I'm not sure why you feel the need to double-quote that. At any rate, the book seems to cover UK law, and in fact is published at Oxford?

Re: Law for Computer Scientists (2020)

#14

Post by dblitt »

Does anyone know of any similar works that instead focus on a common law background (US/UK/others) vs civil law (EU/most of the world), that I am understanding this book focuses on?

This is a topic I am very interested in, but since I am from the US I would prefer to start with law as practiced here.

Edit: only skimmed and it seems this book may be both EU and UK focused. Seems to be funded by the EU European Research Council but published by Oxford?

Re: Law for Computer Scientists (2020)

#16

Post by mo_42 »

When I was studying CS, I had to take some courses outside of CS and I took law. It was pretty fascinating and I even thought once or twice of switching.

I now have the very nerdy perspective that law is the operating system our socially run on. Laws are small snippets of code similar to a predicate in Prolog. We apply them once the conditions are fulfilled.

Re: Law for Computer Scientists (2020)

#18

Post by Terr_ »

mo_42 wrote: post #16

When I was studying CS, I had to take some courses outside of CS and I took law. It was pretty fascinating and I even thought once or twice of switching. I now have the very nerdy perspective that law is the operating system our socially run on. Laws are small snippets of code similar to a predicate in Prolog. We apply them once the conditions are fulfilled.

When you include common-law and look at the broader cycle, I'd argue the legal system is more like a JIT optimization rather than source code: We formalize and streamline lots of existing implicit social rules and shared expectations, things that exist-before and can operate-without any formal legal text... Just not as well.

In other words, the relationship is more like recipes versus cooking. People cooked foods first-- possibly many many times--and then formalized them later with documentation and rules to help make an outcome transferable or fast.

However, it would be a mistake to think that just because recipes are ubiquitous, they are a prerequisite for the process.

Re: Law for Computer Scientists (2020)

#19

Post by johndhi »

godelski wrote: post #17
johndhi wrote: post #15

I'm a lawyer that works in tech. Anybody got questions for me? I fine these primers almost always focus too much on technicalities and don't make the takeaways sufficiently obvious.

Why not write a blog then to fill in that gap?

Been thinking about it, but our industry is a service industry and we prefer to get paid to offer our expertise. If I go out on my own and find myself lacking clients, I might.

Re: Law for Computer Scientists (2020)

#20

Post by johndhi »

genneth wrote: post #10

This is "law" from an European (EU) perspective. The foundations differ in English and US law. I've always thought it would be interesting to compare them in the same way computer scientists compare the design choices in different operating systems. At the top level the same outcomes are desirable, but the lower levels and choices of abstractions are different.

It's really hard to compare them. Just like it's hard to compare one country to another. So many factors.
Post reply on HN