>>The sea was fluid and constantly in movement; it was indivisible, unoccupiable, inexhaustible, indeed unalterable for better or worse via human activity.
The last two properties — "inexhaustible, indeed unalterable" — have certainly turned out to be completely false as human activity scales up exponentially. and for better or worse turns out to be mostly worse, as we have fish populations crashing to near-extinction levels, garbage patches the size of smll continents... The impending breaking of the global food web may be more of an impending threat than climate change, and that's a rolling catastrophe
That's like saying Assembly language needs a rework because everyone codes in JavaScript. Just because it's too complicated for you to follow doesn't mean it would be better to dumb it down.
Not exactly the same, but ARM v8.3+ processors have an instruction named FJCVTZS, which stands for "Floating-point Javascript Convert to Signed fixed-point, rounding toward Zero"
Plenty of things are useful to society even if they are too complicated for the vast majority to follow, experts are a good thing.
What about code? Or structural codes? Or details about electricity generation and distribution?
While I can certainly agree that legislatures should strive to write laws as legibly as possible so that the general populous can understand the laws of their land, I also think we should be educated on how to read laws, where to find the information, etc, basically civics lessons. But to say that complicated laws are useless to society is beyond silly.
Read what I wrote: “too complicated _to_be_followed”.
Complicated laws should correspond to the complexity of the situation that society wants to regulate. Presumably, only those in society that engage in that area will be effected and know what the law means. Otherwise, you have a bureaucratic system which chokes its own people and it’s own growth.
Followed by whom? Every law will end up being too complicated to follow for some fraction of society. Do you think Donald Trump should wriggle out of a lawsuit because the tax or election law was too complicated for him to follow?
Law is CODE. The words are there in that order for many reasons that have been bug tested and are still being bug tested. Test the bugs! But don't claim you can't read the language.
I feel like I responded to this above, but I’ll restate it. First, I’m not really following your logic.
Not everyone is running for President, and are not potentially liable or guilty of breaking the law.
No, law as ‘CODE’ is too monolithic. Citizens cannot face prison because actual life in society may or may run afoul of the law given its vague, ambiguous, or even self defeating language
The last two properties — "inexhaustible, indeed unalterable" — have certainly turned out to be completely false as human activity scales up exponentially. and for better or worse turns out to be mostly worse, as we have fish populations crashing to near-extinction levels, garbage patches the size of smll continents... The impending breaking of the global food web may be more of an impending threat than climate change, and that's a rolling catastrophe