Overall cool article, but it seems to blow by the fact that lawyers aren&#x27;t expected, or usually practically able, to write complete contracts for the solution space (the space being all potential states of the relevant portions of the universe at time of enforcement).<p>When they do they&#x27;re for relatively trivial contracts, or for standardized contracts (think a commodities future) that purposely limit the relevant universe to the easily measurable.<p>I don&#x27;t think we&#x27;re going to see HFL compete with human lawyers in the way that HFT competes with human traders anytime soon. To the extent that dynamically rewritten contracts become a thing I think we&#x27;ll largely view them as an iteration of HFT actually.<p>On a partially related note I was discussing a law-tech idea with a lawyer friend who pointed out the (US at least) issue that law firms have to be owned by attorneys. A lot of potential legal tech ideas then basically are on thin ice if the tech&#x27;s behavior is close enough to the line of lawyering. The HFL described would certainly run into that issue (at least enough for one case to set precedence).