Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2 Neutral

About palmsa

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I had a PC, it was fine. I have a macbook now and its been great
  2. Thanks To clarify, I meant more from a licensing standpoint can lawyers (or paralegals/assistants) access them on behalf of a firm, which intends to use them as is, or as a starting point, for a lawyer's clients. From what I know PracticalLaw does not have as much coverage as LawDepot.
  3. Congrats on both! There are mature crowds you can find in similar situations. Obviously multiple life events like this is tough but you'll get into a routine of things
  4. Does anyone know if lawyers or paralegals can use LawDepot contracts for their own clients?
  5. I appreciate you taking time to respond. I think one thing is clear from my posts, I’m not saying that technology will displace all lawyers, rather I focus on the benefits from letting it augment our decisions with better information, to start. We already do this, think about all the different document management, discovery and crm tools you use today. Young professionals owe it to themselves to be the tip of the spear for new technology, and to be open to further letting it augment their decision making and advisory. AI may be a “pipe dream” but “lower value” tasks are already being augmented with better search, contextual tagging and data science in every industry and the legal industry is not protected. In fact, accounting is the closest industry of professionals that have felt their industry was relatively guarded. You’re actually foreshadowing exactly how this transformation is going to happen, young professionals with clean slates. Tech is exposing the true value of legal work, can we agree on that? You may be an exception, and I hope you are until you retire, but many others aren’t. If I were to borrow the analogy of a market correction from finance, technology leads to value correction, allowing the buyer to better reconcile the true effort for their requirements. It already happening, as you pointed out with all the different incremental innovations. Thankfully, if I may borrow from a finance analogy again, this compounds. Another thing I’ll caution is taking a micro view versus a macro view. Day to day things may feel the same, but if you reflect on your 10 years, you have to agree margins between a firms cost and top-line are shrinking. If you say no, then you’re missing something else. Over those 10 years the biggest cost to firms, wages, has been depressed across many markets. When the top line has a pressure downwards and the bottom line has upward pressure, which is the case right now, technology becomes the safe haven for profit seekers. You will be the decision maker on technology that will change the game for you yet I won’t debate this further either. I wanted to chime in only to ensure we were able to have a constructive conversation, which Ive accomplished. I do appreciate the spirited conversation.
  6. Most are starting with a narrow scope, first one that comes to mind is a Toronto company actually, Blue J legal. I want to say they were part of the Legal Innovation Zone which houses some strong legatech startups, including the startup posted on this thread (Om) IBM and Cloudera are engaged with data lakes at all the top firms.
  7. Haha, pretty funny! Enjoy the DVD you rent at Blockbuster
  8. On your first point, agreed, I agree that there is a difference but the gap is going to close quickly. I work with numerous “tech” companies and I’m floored at how UX is accelerating to help people understand complex scenarios and decisions. On your second point, apologies if I misunderstood, but what I’m saying is that there are consumer legaltech companies that are re-thinking the user experience to the point that legacy issues with DIY kits are being eliminated and almost preferable to speaking to a person. I didn’t go through your post history, but IMHO the impacts of ML are being underestimated in the legal progression
  9. On your first point, good that you're ready to chance your stance. Think about this. Legal advice is as good as the inputs you're given to make to provide that advice. Services like you posted are going to get better at defining and capturing those questions. Second, the advice you give, based on the inputs you receive, is based on your personal understanding of precedent which ends up defining what makes sense and what doesn't for your client. When you don't know something, you consult libraries and peers. Technology is your new peer because it is codifying case law faster than any of your peers can help you understand and will reason over the inputs and provide you a set of advice to consider better than your favourite professor or judge can. The advice you give in the future is going to be from companies like Om Company, Legalzoom or other services. This is happening, welcome and embrace it! On your second point, you're not seeing the point on human errors > software-generated errors.
  10. Human errors > software-driven errors, because the latter gets better through QA and has economies of scale on accuracy.
  11. Software is eating the world. Technology is a better "record keeper" than a lawyer, and is better at capturing and reasoning through all scenarios, than a lawyer can, no matter how experienced they are. The future of the legal profession is to train machine learning models with their "experience" and technology providers, like Om Company, will augment a lawyer's decision making with thorough scenario modelling based on close to perfect information, rather than displace them. This is actually a good thing. Lawyers will be able to provide value added advisory and move away from the lower value tasks, which are also likely to introduce human errors. This is a bullshit post, and is DEFINITELY NOT representative of lawyers' views, especially aspiring students....however I saw another post from you later on (quoted last), so will give you the benefit of the doubt There are statistics, and that is why I am bullish on technology. They're taking a data-driven approach to servicing the market. As aspiring lawyers, law students today should adopt the same "lean startup", mentality. The future of this profession relies on breaking the norm of the current law firm. Come on, another shitty post, which I'm sure isn't representative of all lawyers. We all should be working to make the world a better place, re-think how people access legal services and education. Technology is going to disrupt mindsets like this because "society" doesn't have to rely on professionals like you to tell them that their situation can't be changed. In fact, technology is empowering people to learn and make decisions for themselves. Lawyers and aspiring students that see this, will become widely successful in their careers. Look, yes there is price sensitivity and yes we should optimize for % of consumers. Market size is a lagging indicator and competitiveness, including the use of technology, will disrupt those who are trying to optimize and covet for size of the market. You can argue companies like om company are "codifying" those guidelines. I did some research and they are part of the Legal Innovation Zone and are actually launching a service for lawyers also. I also think assuming cost IS NOT an issue is incorrect but I do agree that your professor is most likely right that lack of education is a bigger variable to consider. Why? Lack of education is what leads to people not being able to reconcile the cost. Self-service legal tech will make lawyers educate their customers on the true value of the services they provide. This was the redeeming post to the above by the way. But you're mistaken on one point, you don't need to pay for education these days. Internet is democratizing access to education and technology is getting dramatically better at "discovering" the right education for a particular situation - which you can argue is what a lawyer does. The faster we all remember that lawyers SERVE their customers, the better it'll be for the legal profession. Just look at the medical profession. Technology is better at probabilistic modelling for diseases than doctors. The same is happening to the legal industry. Doctors aren't going to go away and lawyers aren't either.
  • Create New...