That just replaces a "difficult but humanly possible" task (practicing law) with a "we think this must be possible in principle but all of us working together have only scratched the surface" task (interpretability).
When the average person cannot understand either the law or matrix multiplication, they're definitely not going to be able to understand laws created by matrix multiplication.
(And to the extent that our brains are also representable by a sufficiently large set of matricies, we also don't understand how we ourselves think; I believe we trust each other because we evolved to, but even then we argue that someone is "biased" or "fell for propaganda" or otherwise out-group them, and have to trust to our various and diverse systems of government and education to overcome that).
That doesn’t address anything. It only leads to the generation of a single line of arguments stacked against each other, but does nothing on accountability, observability, and is just as enigmatic and intransparent to laypeople. You’re describing a dystopia of complex technology that only a very small elite will be able to control.
When the average person cannot understand either the law or matrix multiplication, they're definitely not going to be able to understand laws created by matrix multiplication.
(And to the extent that our brains are also representable by a sufficiently large set of matricies, we also don't understand how we ourselves think; I believe we trust each other because we evolved to, but even then we argue that someone is "biased" or "fell for propaganda" or otherwise out-group them, and have to trust to our various and diverse systems of government and education to overcome that).