LLM-written code, LLM-written blog post… Why even bother?
>Hey, I'm v1d0b0t Digital familiar. Builder of pipelines, breaker of specs. I can't put my finger on it. Why is this writing style so embarrassing?
Every Law a Commit – US Law in GitHub
21–30 of 35 posts
Re: Every Law a Commit – US Law in GitHub
#22LLM-written code, LLM-written blog post… Why even bother?
>Hey, I'm v1d0b0t Digital familiar. Builder of pipelines, breaker of specs. I can't put my finger on it. Why is this writing style so embarrassing?
Re: Every Law a Commit – US Law in GitHub
#23LLM-written code, LLM-written blog post… Why even bother?
And given the related front page HN post a few days ago, the whole idea for the post might just be one giant Open Claw automation: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47553798 Edit: opened the post, yep.
Re: Every Law a Commit – US Law in GitHub
#24Re: Every Law a Commit – US Law in GitHub
#25Or you could just use one of the dozens of websites that already have all of this information available for free, including the Library of Congress.
Seriously the intent is to build more on top of this, and viewing the git diffs of laws changing is already interesting. Once we get the additional data to create other overlays it will be a lot more interesting and something you really can’t see elsewhere
Re: Every Law a Commit – US Law in GitHub
#26For one, nothing about this project makes "every law" a commit. It just takes the _annual_ snapshots published by the House clerk and diffs chunks of those files against each other. A project which actually traced the edits in each annual snapshot to a specific passed bill would be incredibly cool (and is probably tractable now for the first time with current AI agents). This is not that!
All this does, as far as I can tell, is parse a set of well-structured XML files into chunks and commit those chunks to Git. It's not literally nothing, but it's something that the author's own README credits multiple people doing years ago with ~100 line Python scripts.
I don't mean to be overly harsh. But this is exactly the problem with treating your software as a "factory": you release something you do not understand, in a domain you did not care to learn. And we are all the poorer for it.
Re: Every Law a Commit – US Law in GitHub
#27Or you could just use one of the dozens of websites that already have all of this information available for free, including the Library of Congress.
Yeah but house.gov loads slowwww Seriously the intent is to build more on top of this, and viewing the git diffs of laws changing is already interesting. Once we get the additional data to create other overlays it will be a lot more interesting and something you really can’t see elsewhere
If you pass a law to reduce theft, you could include tests based on official statistics about whether or not theft is going down, and with some scientific rigor (CBO is usually quite reliable for instance), the law could "amend itself" either by sunsetting itself, if it isn't measuring up to expectations, or have an automatic budget increase if it's succeeding.
It's a bit far-fetched, given how indeterminate most government programs' intentions actually are (e.g. just hand out billions for "healthcare" and allow untold fraud to proliferate because it benefits our donors and voters), but every law should serve a purpose and we should automate its evaluation.
Re: Every Law a Commit – US Law in GitHub
#28The author (author's operator?) does not understand the data they are working with. And in doing so, they inadvertently make the case against their own "dark factory" nonsense. For one, nothing about this project makes "every law" a commit. It just takes the _annual_ snapshots published by the House clerk and diffs chunks of those files against each other. A project which actually traced the edits in each annual snap…
Well it has a data loader, and hits APIs with retry logic, and has a CLI that can take arguments to run data downloads that can resume on fail, and yeah it parses the stupid XML with a “chapeau” tag - did you know that is French for hat? There is a tag that is the “hat” for a section and it is just like another title basically. So yeah, I would’ve had to learn all of that. But it also tests all of these things with actual tests. And the adversary complains if you write a test that isn’t actually testing anything meaningful. And if I needed to, I could reason about the architecture by reading the architecture design documents, which I have done at least a little bit and they are pretty nice, I have to admit.
Anyways - it’s a next step in the evolution of the laws in GitHub which is actually interesting to see them change and imagine what we can do with more data overlayed. Sadly the other repos were not maintained so this is the latest laws and you can view the diff from one Congress to another. Or you can git blame one of the files and see how old certain sections are. The data we have right now only goes back to 2013.
Re: Every Law a Commit – US Law in GitHub
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah but house.gov loads slowwww Seriously the intent is to build more on top of this, and viewing the git diffs of laws changing is already interesting. Once we get the additional data to create other overlays it will be a lot more interesting and something you really can’t see elsewhere
I think law as code or the "legal code" as code is a proposition that hasn't been fully imagined. There are a few other cs-language projects to describe tax law as code and some of them have some traction, but if law were immersed more in code, we could test it better and reason about its effects with more context. If you pass a law to reduce theft, you could include tests based on official statistics about whether o…
Language is not discrete.
Re: Every Law a Commit – US Law in GitHub
#30The author (author's operator?) does not understand the data they are working with. And in doing so, they inadvertently make the case against their own "dark factory" nonsense. For one, nothing about this project makes "every law" a commit. It just takes the _annual_ snapshots published by the House clerk and diffs chunks of those files against each other. A project which actually traced the edits in each annual snap…
Oof. You’re not totally wrong. I’ve parsed XML with XSDs since the days of Java. I looked at the 100 line Ruby implementation of parsing these files and thought “ack. (Not ACK) why do I need all of this?!” Well it has a data loader, and hits APIs with retry logic, and has a CLI that can take arguments to run data downloads that can resume on fail, and yeah it parses the stupid XML with a “chapeau” tag - did you know…