From: Eugene Leitl (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Tue Aug 01 2000 - 14:31:34 PDT
Dave Long writes:
> all of which are interesting, but none of which addressed my main
> point: if everyone agrees on the facts of the case A, B, and there
Every case is slightly different. The human (perfect, angelic,
incorruptable) can still enter into the laptop ad lib, and there will
be always entirely new classes of cases, not yet codified.
> is a consensus in the society that a verdict ought to be a function
> of those facts alone, and not other information C or D, then having
> published decision tables (which all parties can evaluate) is a way
> to ensure that the verdict which results is really f(A,B) instead
> of f(A,B,phase of the moon).
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Aug 01 2000 - 15:37:46 PDT