82,927
edits
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{a|design|}}{{Quote| | {{a|design|}}{{Quote| | ||
{{caps|'''[[Legal ops]]'''}}: We must innovate! We have earmarked technology budget to innovate! <br> | {{caps|'''[[Legal ops]]'''}}: We must innovate! We have earmarked technology budget to innovate! <br> | ||
{{caps|'''[[JC]]'''}}: Great! How about some decent document comparison software? | {{caps|'''[[JC]]'''}}: Great! How about some decent document comparison software? [[Microsoft]]’s comparison engine sucks. <br> | ||
{{caps|'''[[Legal ops]]'''}}: We can’t use our | {{caps|'''[[Legal ops]]'''}}: We can’t use our funds on that. <br> | ||
{{caps|'''[[JC]]'''}}: Why not? <br> | {{caps|'''[[JC]]'''}}: Why not? <br> | ||
{{caps|'''[[Legal ops]]'''}}: Because it isn’t very innovative | {{caps|'''[[Legal ops]]'''}}: Because it isn’t very innovative? <br> | ||
{{caps|'''[[JC]]'''}}: Would it change your mind if I told you it runs on [[blockchain]]? <br> | {{caps|'''[[JC]]'''}}: Would it change your mind if I told you it runs on [[blockchain]]? <br> | ||
{{caps|'''[[Legal ops]]'''}}: YES! Does it? <br> | {{caps|'''[[Legal ops]]'''}}: YES! Does it? <br> | ||
Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
{{caps|'''[[JC]]'''}} and {{caps|'''Sofware Vendor'''}} ''(in unison)'': Nothing. <br> | {{caps|'''[[JC]]'''}} and {{caps|'''Sofware Vendor'''}} ''(in unison)'': Nothing. <br> | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Author|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 network|neural networks]], [[AI]], [[distributed ledger]]s, permissionless, decentralised currency exchanges. | |||
Things that persistently look like technology, we call “bad technology”. O Paradox. | It looks like ''furniture''. | ||
Things that persistently ''look'' like technology, we call “bad technology”. | |||
O Paradox. | |||
{{sa}} | |||
*[[Why is legaltech so disappointing]] |