[tmalsburg2]

> Though for law, I think some ambiguity is beneficial.

Ambiguity means that there are two or more possible interpretations and it's not clear which of them is intended. That's hardly useful. What's beneficial, and what you perhaps had in mind, is some amount of under-specification where the meaning is clear but leaves gaps to be filled in by judges.

[godelski]

Yes, this is what I mean. More focus on the intention. But I do also think we should give judges a lot of flexibility (technically they do). Because things are changing all the time.