Clearing up AI Law Interpretation

[Marquesas]

the problem with enforcing override = negate as a rule is that there's no single word that does what override's second meaning is, while there are tens of other words that perform override's first meaning.

We're not enforcing it.

this means that the current interpretation of override includes in it an unintended support of annoying "law bloat" where people use ten words where one would do nicely.

if you want to mean "in the event of conflict, this law takes precedence over law 2", the word you'd use in the English language is "this law overrides law 2"

This law overrides law 2 in the event of a law conflict. Simply solved. Not bloated. Clear.

just enforce that override =/= negate simply because if you wanted to mean "negate" you'd just say "negate"

No.