EFTA00834259.pdf
👁 1
💬 0
📄 Extracted Text (384 words)
From: Vincenzo Iozzo
To: "Jeffrey E." <[email protected]>
Subject: Fwd: SMT Solvers for legal code
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2016 04:45:32 +0000
Sent from my Iphone
Begin forwarded message:
From: Vincenzo Iozzo
Date: February 17, 2016 at 13:43:17 GMT+9
To: Joichi Ito
Cc: Alexander Lourie
Subject: SMT Solvers for legal code
Ok so as you probably remember I've been rewriting the language used in the cyber export control stuff for the
Wassenaar agreement. And I noticed an amusing thing: policy people and lawyers like the "unpacking" of
clauses.
Essentially you take something like:
4.e.l.a "technology" according to the General technology note for the "development", "production" or "use" of
equipment or "software" specified by 4.D
4. D "software" specially designed or modified for the generation, operation or delivery of, or communication
with, "intrusion software"
And you unpack them to:
"Technology" "required" (Le 'peculiarly responsible for achieving or exceeding the controlled performance
levels, characteristics of functions) for the "development", "production" or "use" of [4.D "Software" specially
designed or modified for the generation, operation or delivery of, or communication with, "intrusion software")
Now there are these things called "SMT solvers" (satisfiability modulo theory) that are essentially fancy
calculators based on theories. Eg: you take the rules of real numbers or the rules of geometry or the rules of
how strings work inside computers, then you take formulas/sentences that are supposed to operate in the theory
and you verify whether the formula/sentence is satisfiable or not.
Example: "for every Y and for every X such that X = Y + 1, Y*X is even" would tell you that is SAT in the
integer theory but not in the real (numbers) theory
So I was half jokingly thinking: what if somebody built a SMT solvers for legal stuff? And more importantly:
what if you used an SMT solver to make your case in court?
Essentially this would be "the letter of the law" on steroids, but you could also prove the inconsistency of it and
then argue that the "spirit of the law" is bullshit if the letter is inconsistent?
EFTA00834259
Joi, The ML should do that! I will gladly help both in the building phase and in the testing phase (Sandy, for the
testing phase I need all your pro bono time though :p)
Sent from my Iphone
EFTA00834260
ℹ️ Document Details
SHA-256
5c64d5b7ae767b3cac86728ade8e5bc0dfce9a91168676c9181b900f5857b68c
Bates Number
EFTA00834259
Dataset
DataSet-9
Type
document
Pages
2
💬 Comments 0