Legaltech startup conference: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) m (Amwelladmin moved page Legal tech entrepreneurs say the funniest things to Legaltech start-up conference) Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{a|devil| | {{a|devil| | ||
[[File:Kids say the funniest things.png|450px|thumb|center|An occasional column devoted to gems from the IT profession]] | [[File:Kids say the funniest things.png|450px|thumb|center|An occasional column devoted to gems from the IT profession]] | ||
}}We define a [[legaltech start-up conference]] as “opportunities for fantasists to meet the credulous | }}We define a [[legaltech start-up conference]] as “opportunities for [[Reg tech entrepreneur|fantasists]] to meet the [[General counsel|credulous]] to try to sell them [[Legal tech landscape|stuff they don’t need]] with [[When budget allows|budgets they don’t have]]”. | ||
Here is an interesting list for the [[neural network]] to parse: here are the two hundred and seventy-seven [[Vendor|Vendors]] listed in the Legal Geek “Startup Map”<ref>I am not making this up: https://www.legalgeek.co/startup-map/. There could be more: the utterly bamboozling way it is set out made it hard to be sure I had go them all.</ref> Now I confess, not all of these are necessarily for profit businesses (by which I mean ''intending'' to make a profit; a large portion of them, however well disposed to the ''idea'' of making a profit, won’t ''actually'' make one) — there are some, even at a quick scan, that don’t. | Here is an interesting list for the [[neural network]] to parse: here are the two hundred and seventy-seven (277) [[Vendor|Vendors]] listed in the Legal Geek “Startup Map”<ref>I am not making this up: https://www.legalgeek.co/startup-map/. There could be more: the utterly bamboozling way it is set out made it hard to be sure I had go them all.</ref> Now I confess, not all of these are necessarily for profit businesses (by which I mean ''intending'' to make a profit; a large portion of them, however well disposed to the ''idea'' of making a profit, won’t ''actually'' make one) — there are some, even at a quick scan, that don’t. But it is a minority. | ||
But let’s just say, for the sake of argument, that | But let’s just say, for the sake of argument, that the rest do. Now there can be no doubt that the amount a multinational is prepared to spend in the pursuit, defence and analysis of its legal rights and obligations is, as far as makes any difference, infinite, but the ''categories of problem'' it encounters when doing that, that [[legaltech]] can profitably solve, are not. | ||
The [[legaltech entrepreneur]]’s assumption is this: even a tiny fraction of an enormous number is still, for a couple of guys in a WeWork office in Shoreditch with laptop, a SquareSpace account and a Bulgarian coder they found on UpWork, a bloody big number. | |||
This logic might fly — ''might'' — were there only one'' such “startup” with the bright idea, but, per the above, there are ''at least two hundred and seventy of them''. | |||
''There are only so many uses you can put technology to''. Do not confuse quantum of spend and things to spend it on. They are very different. | |||
Even leaving aside the [[JC]]”s usual perorations about scale and [[rent-extraction threshold]]s — plainly these are to be ignored — just the length of this list ought to prompt some questions. | Even leaving aside the [[JC]]”s usual perorations about scale and [[rent-extraction threshold]]s — plainly these are to be ignored — just the length of this list ought to prompt some questions. |