The document discusses Hildebrandt's taxonomy of code-driven law, data-driven law, and text-driven law. It notes that code-driven law involves legal norms articulated in computer code, while data-driven law uses automatic decision-making derived from statistical/inductive methods. Text-driven law refers to legal activity performed by humans using sources like statutes and case law. The document also examines various issues that can arise with computational approaches to law, such as whether training data adequately represents the problem domain and whether all relevant facts and rules are considered. It acknowledges limitations in fully formalizing concepts like justice and cautions that computational ideals assume problems may be solved perfectly.