TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

“But lawyers know nothing about tech ”

30 点作者 detaro将近 2 年前

14 条评论

TimPC将近 2 年前
I think a lot of tech companies that spout this nonsense don't understand how law works. Routinely I see products based entirely around reducing lawyer's billable hours. They'll only implement that kicking and screaming if clients force them to bill less. If clients aren't putting pressure on them to be more efficient they will happily bill more hours than are truly needed in discovery rather than using state of the art tools to reduce billable hours. If you don't understand your market is billing hourly and come up with ways to work within that framework you aren't going to be successful.
评论 #36511392 未加载
dugmartin将近 2 年前
Every real estate transaction I&#x27;ve done has involved two sets of lawyers mailing Word docs to each other with me cc&#x27;ed with names like &quot;Purchase and Sale (2) - Copy - Latest&quot;.<p>I actually mentioned to my last lawyer that there is established and well used technology that can show changes between documents. She seemed uninterested and a couple of days later I had to email her about a clause that got dropped in one of the Word doc email tornados the day before.<p>I see no mention of any kind of version control in this article. It seems crazy to me but I guess that would drive down billable hours.
评论 #36511343 未加载
评论 #36511289 未加载
评论 #36511549 未加载
评论 #36511196 未加载
gnicholas将近 2 年前
The selling point for tech is often that it makes you more efficient. But law firms don&#x27;t want to be more efficient because their income is tied to the billable hour. Partners, who run the firm, know that if you make their associates more efficient, they will literally make less money doing the same amount of work.<p>There are some firms that understand the value of efficiency (especially those that do fixed-fee or value-based billing), but most of the largest firms aren&#x27;t especially interested in increasing efficiency.
评论 #36511047 未加载
评论 #36512895 未加载
评论 #36513073 未加载
评论 #36511339 未加载
评论 #36511469 未加载
评论 #36511570 未加载
denton-scratch将近 2 年前
Lawyers have the reputation for being tech-ignorant because for a long time they were. Long after everyone else was using word-processors, lawyers relied on typists and shorthand secretaries.<p>That got shaken up with the arrival of knowledge management systems; law firms led that charge.<p>Most politicians are lawyers; and most politicians <i>are</i> tech-ignorant. That sustains the myth.
评论 #36511039 未加载
评论 #36510919 未加载
anthonybsd将近 2 年前
&gt;Pretty much every day, I read something to the effect of &quot;lawyers are clueless when it comes to tech lol&quot;.<p>&lt;chuckle&gt; Read the article, seems reasonable.<p>Connect with Neil on LinkedIn -&gt; 404 page.<p>All righty then.
评论 #36510994 未加载
评论 #36511355 未加载
ajkjk将近 2 年前
Aside: the quip &quot;when people go to a DIY store, they might buy a drill, but what they really want is a hole in their wall.&quot; is such a bad take. No, what they want is a drill. If they wanted a hole they would borrow their friend&#x27;s drill. But they just moved into an apartment or house, or they&#x27;re starting their life of collecting DIY items, and one of the things they&#x27;re going to need to own is a drill. The person that follows this adage and tries to figure out a way to trick them into buying a hole is an asshole. The person who directs them to a good, durable, versatile, high-quality drill is in the right. If both sides of the transaction could clearly see who is doing that and who isn&#x27;t, everyone would be better off --- but in tech they usually can&#x27;t.
focusedone将近 2 年前
&gt; If you work with me and think &quot;I wish Neil used [x]&quot; or &quot;this would be so much easier if Neil had a system to do [y]&quot;, please let me know. I&#x27;m always happy to get feedback, and I certainly don&#x27;t know everything.<p>This is a rare but wonderful point of view, particularly among non-technical-field professionals.
TX81Z将近 2 年前
As somebody deploying some very advanced technologies in the litigation space I think this is a reflection of his own docket, not the broader space. There is definitely a need and a market for highly specialized tools in certain segments of the law.
bmitc将近 2 年前
I think it&#x27;s more accurate to say that lawyers only know about lawyer stuff. They live in their own constructed reality that is quite different from normal logic, intuition, and processes.
评论 #36510959 未加载
thessa将近 2 年前
They know enough to stay away from it.<p>I created software to expedite discovery analysis of labor disputes, and when pitching it to lawyers I was literally told “you’re saying you created something that will take milliseconds to do what would take me weeks? Why would I want that? I get paid by the hour.”
electricmonk将近 2 年前
This blog post was written by a lawyer that writes shell-scripts to automate presumably job related tasks, but it reads like he didn&#x27;t even read the article he&#x27;s critiquing (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.lawgazette.co.uk&#x2F;practice&#x2F;profession-sitting-on-the-fence-with-lawtech-&#x2F;5116448.article" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.lawgazette.co.uk&#x2F;practice&#x2F;profession-sitting-on-...</a>) because he hates that he’s lumped in with lawyers that don’t embrace technology. Despite being a lawyer that lurks on Hacker News, I can admit that I’ve found the article&#x27;s point mostly true.<p>The clear thrust of the article Neil is critiquing, right at the top:<p>- &quot;A study of attitudes to lawtech carried out by The University of Manchester, University College London and the Law Society finds that a lack of understanding by, and encouragement from, senior managers is proving a barrier to the uptake of technologies such as artificial intelligence.&quot;<p>Neil&#x27;s framing:<p>- &quot;Pretty much every day, I read something to the effect of &#x27;lawyers are clueless when it comes to tech lol&#x27; ... sigh&quot;<p>From the article:<p>- &quot;less than a third (32%) use even basic lawtech, such as legal databases and contract review software.&quot;<p>From Neil:<p>- What on earth is &quot;lawtech&quot;?<p>From the article:<p>- &quot;&#x27;The legal profession is at a crossroads, with new technologies that promise to transform virtually every aspect of the legal services sector starting to gather pace,&#x27; she said. &#x27;However, our report suggests that this transformation might not be as rapid as some would think. It is clear that there is a business case for adopting lawtech, but people are not necessarily equating this to how it will benefit them personallySenior managers and leaders within law firms need to think about creating a clear connection between the benefits to the organisation and the benefits to the individual, if they want to get the buy-in they need from their professional colleagues.&#x27;&quot;<p>There are some lawyers that get tech, but many more have only a very surface level understanding, if that. Especially the “senior managers” the article is directed towards. I understand this article is directed at the UK, but my favorite example of this is SCOTUS justices learning that text messages are routed through, and stored on, intermediary servers. Chief Justice John Roberts, during oral argument in Ontario v. Quon (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.supremecourt.gov&#x2F;oral_arguments&#x2F;argument_transcripts&#x2F;2009&#x2F;08-1332.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.supremecourt.gov&#x2F;oral_arguments&#x2F;argument_transcr...</a>): “I thought, you know, you push a button; it goes right to the other thing” followed by Justice Scalia: “You mean it doesn&#x27;t go right to the other thing?”
评论 #36511330 未加载
tejtm将近 2 年前
The best place to get surplus huge computer monitors was the local law school they always needed to be showing off the latest and greatest shiny tech amongst themselves.
seanhunter将近 2 年前
There are for sure lawyers who know nothing about tech, but there are definitely some who are very strong on tech. Two examples from my personal experience:<p>1. I know a lawyer who did comp sci at Stanford before doing his law degree at either Yale or Harvard I forget which. He was very knowledgeable about all the licensing, IP protection issues etc relevant to software.<p>2. I work regularly with an ex-dev who is now a lawyer who specializing in infosec and data privacy issues. He runs packet captures on sites and checks for unintentional data leakage&#x2F;gdpr violations when sites somewhere call out to google tag manager or put 3rd-party trackers somewhere. In an enterprise context there are a bajillion places this can happen so it&#x27;s great to have a lawyer who understands what&#x27;s ok and not but also is technical enough to use curl against a rest api or can run (and understand) packet captures when different web actions occur.
awill将近 2 年前
maybe we need a new title. Just like we have PM and TPM, we need T-Lawyer :)