I'm not sure what your point is. The laws can't be written clearer? Even if they were, you'd still get stuff that's ambiguous? As a lawyer you don't write the law so you have to go with what's written? You like interpreting vaguely written rules?
It's just how language works. Language is inherently ambiguous in the strictest sense. It's why at times you need to use more and more words to convey a clear message to someone, but in some sense, it's a never ending rabbit hole. Most of the time though, you don't need to be super precise in order to get a general message across to someone. Just something good enough.
That's a great read, thanks for linking it. The twist at the end is kind of funny because it makes you think, "do I really get it"?
I guess sometimes words just aren't enough, you need actual experience. Which I guess if we're taking legal stuff, that's where case law comes in, right?
Well, in a way, it's not "just words" or "experience?" It took me a long time to love the law, well after I was out of law school -- which was basically getting over the cynicism. It's just overwhelmingly the best method of dealing with perhaps the MOST DIFFICULT task possible, resolving disputes between/among imperfect unpredictable humans. The "messiness" of it is just as much a feature as a bug, and thus the most important part really does become, for lack of a better way to say it -- "faith?" in law?
Not that it's impossible to improve things, but people (frequently techies) believe the problem to be solvable and relatedly think it's easier than it actually is.
