Once humans had only informal systems of gossip and norm enforcement, but now we also have formal systems of law. These formal legal systems supposedly have many features designed to overcome problems with prior informal norm systems. For example, with gossip we tend to support the claims of our immediate associates without investigating contrary evidence, but we require formal law judges to instead consider evidence from all sides before making their judgments.
Yeah, but it's a formal system. I'd say a lot of formslisation is bureaucratic and much of it not valuable. You can formalise in productive or unproductive ways.
Once it gets more expensive to sue, that gives an opening for government to impose more small fines that no one will challenge because the process is too expensive for that. That's an extension of govt power, but not really of valuable legal process.
On the subject of speculative markets, how about a "retrodiction market" in conspiracy theories or even a "fake news futures market"? That is, instead of trying to censor speech on social media or regulate algorithms, we let people bet on the truth values of various JFK conspiracy theories, "the plandemic", whether 9/11 was an inside job, etc. See: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol...
There is a little bit of development of formal systems going on -blockchain based things for example. I would see the widespread creation of non-criminal fines over the last 50 years as the law extending into other areas. Although jury trials have reduced as a proportion of cases, and in many courts cases have become siper expensive, there has also been an increase in work for minor courts and tribunals. The move of workers compensation from civil courts to workers comp formula based tribunals for example has made workers comp more accessible, and nearly every case gets some type of formal assessment.
These things generally develop slowly though. It has probably always looked like things are going too slow to those with promising new ideas.
Could https://www.overcomingbias.... explain it? Similar to middle management rejecting prediction markets: everyone thinks they're elite and that making their elite actions more legible would reduce their power and influence.
Yeah, but it's a formal system. I'd say a lot of formslisation is bureaucratic and much of it not valuable. You can formalise in productive or unproductive ways.
Once it gets more expensive to sue, that gives an opening for government to impose more small fines that no one will challenge because the process is too expensive for that. That's an extension of govt power, but not really of valuable legal process.
I'd favor that, but I expect most authorities who now censor would oppose.
On the subject of speculative markets, how about a "retrodiction market" in conspiracy theories or even a "fake news futures market"? That is, instead of trying to censor speech on social media or regulate algorithms, we let people bet on the truth values of various JFK conspiracy theories, "the plandemic", whether 9/11 was an inside job, etc. See: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol...
There is a little bit of development of formal systems going on -blockchain based things for example. I would see the widespread creation of non-criminal fines over the last 50 years as the law extending into other areas. Although jury trials have reduced as a proportion of cases, and in many courts cases have become siper expensive, there has also been an increase in work for minor courts and tribunals. The move of workers compensation from civil courts to workers comp formula based tribunals for example has made workers comp more accessible, and nearly every case gets some type of formal assessment.
These things generally develop slowly though. It has probably always looked like things are going too slow to those with promising new ideas.
Maybe
Could https://www.overcomingbias.... explain it? Similar to middle management rejecting prediction markets: everyone thinks they're elite and that making their elite actions more legible would reduce their power and influence.