Furniture: Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
Technology which does integrate seamlessly into our lives doesn’t ''look'' like technology for very long: ''email''. The Internet. Smartphones. Wikipedia. Google. We have moved on. We are looking at [[Neural network|neural networks]], [[AI]], [[distributed ledger]]s, permissionless, decentralised currency exchanges. | Technology which does integrate seamlessly into our lives doesn’t ''look'' like technology for very long: ''email''. The Internet. Smartphones. Wikipedia. Google. We have moved on. We are looking at [[Neural network|neural networks]], [[AI]], [[distributed ledger]]s, permissionless, decentralised currency exchanges. | ||
It looks like ''furniture''. | It looks like ''[[furniture]]''. | ||
Things that persistently ''look'' like technology, we call | Things that persistently ''look'' like [[technology]], we call “''bad'' technology”. | ||
O Paradox. | O Paradox. | ||
{{sa}} | {{sa}} | ||
*[[Novelty fatigue]] | |||
*[[Why is legaltech so disappointing]] | *[[Why is legaltech so disappointing]] | ||
Revision as of 11:54, 8 December 2022
|
The design of organisations and products
|
Legal ops: We must innovate! We have earmarked technology budget to innovate!
JC: Great! How about some decent document comparison software? Microsoft’s comparison engine sucks.
Legal ops: We can’t use our funds on that.
JC: Why not?
Legal ops: Because it isn’t very innovative?
JC: Would it change your mind if I told you it runs on blockchain?
Legal ops: YES! Does it?
JC (pauses): Um, yes. Sure it does.
Sofware Vendor: Wait, what? No, it d —
JC (to SV, sotto voce): Do you want this contract?
Legal ops: What was that?
JC and Sofware Vendor (in unison): Nothing.
Stewart Brand has a great expression for the kind of technology that is so good, so effective, that you don’t really think of it as technology: the “invisible present”.
Technology which does integrate seamlessly into our lives doesn’t look like technology for very long: email. The Internet. Smartphones. Wikipedia. Google. We have moved on. We are looking at neural networks, AI, distributed ledgers, permissionless, decentralised currency exchanges.
It looks like furniture.
Things that persistently look like technology, we call “bad technology”.
O Paradox.