[CPLX]

Quantity has a quality all its own. When technology makes things possible that were impractical before it changes the underlying social bargain behind the rule.

For example anyone can sue anyone else, but mass filing of lawsuits by computer presents a novel problem.

This kind of issue happens all the time.

[ghaff]

Someone else mentioned speed limit enforcement (or really a lot of traffic laws generally). There's essentially a contract between people and the state whereby most people accept that there are traffic laws that they'll loosely follow and the state can enforce the laws but will almost universally ignore or miss minor infractions.

The situation would be quite a bit different in the US if automated tickets were sent out (or money were just deducted from a bank account) every time someone went 5 miles per hour over the speed limit.

[fivefives55555]

> There's essentially a contract between people and the state whereby most people accept that there are traffic laws that they'll loosely follow and the state can enforce the laws but will almost universally ignore or miss minor infractions.

Someone should let small town cops know about this contract. I've been ticketed for speeding 7, 5, and even 3 miles over the limit. I've also once had my car searched for running a stop sign (at 2 in the morning, when other than the cop car lurking in the parking lot, there were absolutely no cars anywhere). I was a teenager back then, and didn't know my rights, or had any resources to pursue legal recourse. But the point is that traffic laws are enforced extremely erratically, depending on where you happen to be living in a country.

[fivefives55555]

I guess my question is then, what is the limit? Should a business be allowed to bar as many people as it can do so without using automated technology?