Clearing up AI Law Interpretation

[UrsulaMejor]

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

wrong. the moment conflict arises, law 2 is no longer a law; permanently. this is a valid interpretation of the wording because those words in that order could just mean that the foolish human meant "when law 2 conflicts with this law, this law rules that law two is overrided, I.e, negated, no longer exists" with no specified end time fir the negation and therefore a permanent removal the first time someone gives the ai an order it can't follow.

you'd need several other words to mean what you intend to mean. such as, "in the event of a conflict with law 2, this law overrides law 2 for the duration of the conflict only" or something. this means 1/2 the law is literally a dumb statement about when not to follow other laws and it's an annoying amount of bloat for a role that gets enough annoying spam walls of text asking it to say farts