One of the latest ideas of the servants of the people is to ban walking chickens in Russian cities
Another rationalization proposal, distinguished by its originality, was submitted to the State Duma the other day. This time Oleg Lebedev, Chairman of the Committee on Ecology, Natural Resources and Environmental Protection, flashed. He proposed to ban walking chickens on the streets of cities. Say, the health of poultry is endangered, because it breathes fumes and dust. And also, apparently, chickens constantly get in the way underfoot on Okhotny Ryad and Tverskaya.
And this on a federal scale, the caring people's deputies are extremely worried.
“Exhaust fumes, dirt and noise will harm the health of the chicken,” lawmakers say. “If a citizen buys a chicken, he must answer for it, including before society.”
Yes, any Russian must certainly answer for those whom he has tamed, including chickens. How else?
A couple of years ago, such statements could only be found on satirical sites. Now this is our life. Apparently, this is why satire died in Russia. She still can't outdo reality.
The deputies have only one type of lawmaking left: to ban everything, and sometimes bringing the bans to complete nonsense, so that it becomes either very funny or very scary.
Recently, as we remember, in the regions it was allowed to kill stray dogs right and left. Chickens are much more fortunate in this regard. At least take care of their health. Even more care about the health of mushrooms. Having torn off some Red Book species, the violator can recently drive off to places not so distant for nine years. The same amount is given for murder without aggravating circumstances.
The trouble is the beginning. Kur is a pity. And it's a pity for mushrooms.
But who will take care of the mental health of Russians who are forced to comply with all these prohibitions? Why are they?
Once I was talking with a legislator. It was about the adoption of another rather senseless prohibition project. I tried to find out: why is she so advocating for him?
“Everything that is not forbidden is allowed. This is a loophole for violations. Therefore it is wrong. It is necessary to ban everything that is possible so that the mosquito does not undermine the nose, ”the lady answered verbatim.
Thank God, the madness of laws in Russia is compensated only by the optionality of their implementation. But after all, the more you prohibit, the more the spring is compressed, sooner or later it will reach its limit in order to rush back and hit everyone involved and not involved in the forehead so that it doesn’t seem enough. Moreover, it is impossible to foresee absolutely everything. The more they ban, the more they violate.
This is where artificial intelligence can help. The same AI that some consider a panacea for all the ills of civilization, while others consider it a Pandora's box that will still show Kuz'kin's mother to us all.
As you know, with the help of AI with texts, you can do anything you want, including including and test bills for factual errors and legal literacy. And also, subject to writing an appropriate program, on logic, common sense, moral and ethical principles.
AI can't lie. Unless, of course, we ourselves teach him this over time.
— The use of artificial intelligence technologies can simplify the search for logical gaps and shortcomings in the bills proposed to the society, — says lawyer Alexander Skovorodko. — And the use of machine learning and artificial neural networks — to optimize the legislation, make it more streamlined and efficient in terms of identifying outdated and duplicate rules of law, conflicts between them, controversial and ambiguous formulations. A robot assistant to a deputy will be able to quickly and competently give an opinion on any controversial issue in real time, using, for example, Big Data technology (programs that are designed to analyze, process and extract information from large data sets with a complex structure. — Author .). AI technologies can suggest the most appropriate and adequate management decisions, which are sometimes so lacking in our society.
— People are afraid that artificial intelligence can replace a person in many jobs. Maybe a deputy?
— I think innovative technologies are being introduced to increase efficiency, and not to fire as many people as possible. If in the process of replacement someone loses their position, therefore, their activities were not properly organized or had the potential for optimization, for example, in terms of costs.
— What if AI shows itself so well that we can even do without someone from the deputy corps?
— This is a natural stage of evolution in many areas. You don't have to be afraid of it. Although I personally see another threat here: will the use of AI lead to the complete degradation of lawmaking? After all, all the functions of developing and adopting laws will eventually be shifted to him, and the deputies will only put signatures. But in general, drafting a law can be similar to writing a computer program. All versions of the changes and their authors will be available in digital format. To make it clear who and what added there. By the way, it is much easier for the Russian legal system to technologically introduce a digital format, since the Russian legal tradition proceeds from logic, from the general to the particular, which makes it easier to draw up an algorithm, and the Western European legal culture is built on the application of a precedent.
— But maybe you shouldn't trust AI so blindly? What if he is wrong too?
— Yes, it is always necessary to remember the limitations of the use of artificial intelligence methods in the legislative sphere, since in order to solve urgent problems, a person is needed who is able to create an appropriate program and who has knowledge in all sectors and areas required for the development of bills. But a person, of course, can also be subjective. Therefore, you should be very careful, because, most importantly, do no harm.
About 100-150 years ago, especially in the USA, a huge number of stupid laws were passed, which now may seem strange or ridiculous. But if we look at the prerequisites for their implementation, we can see the grain of common sense in everyone. Any laws are based on the needs of real life.
Thus, in Alaska it is forbidden to give alcohol to a moose under the threat of a fine. And all because one day some moose drank beer from a local brewery and made a rout. In Louisiana, you can't order pizza for anyone who hasn't been warned about it first. Suddenly a person refuses to receive it and complains about the imposed service.
Some laws are repealed over time because they become obsolete, or other circumstances are found out, for example, that bans only lead to worse. Previously, for example, in the state of Georgia, it was impossible to keep two glasses of alcohol on the table at the same time. But, having found out that citizens quickly empty one glass to order a second one, and thus get completely drunk, the law was repealed.
Russian legal tradition, oddly enough, has always been more adequate. And she did not go from the particular to the general, not from case law, but vice versa — from the general to the particular.
And suddenly, in the last five years, everything has turned upside down. Why? It's just that in the past, some crazy ideas got stuck in the initiative stage. There were disputes and debates in Parliament. How do you like an offer to marry a prostitute to someone who slept with her in order to reduce the number of brothels? But this was seriously proposed in the Duma in 2015, but just as seriously rejected.
And now deputies are increasingly assenting and agreeing with their colleagues, no matter how absurd they may have proposed.
In general, we are waiting for what they decide there about the suffering chickens.