83,357
edits
LegalHub: theory: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
[[Reg tech]]’s shortcomings present in different ways but boil down to the same thing: ''[[rent-seeking]]''. | [[Reg tech]]’s shortcomings present in different ways but boil down to the same thing: ''[[rent-seeking]]''. | ||
*'''It’s [[iatrogenic]]''': Because the provider’s primary interest is its annuity, ''[[iatrogenics|the cure tends, in practice, to be worse than the disease]]''. | *'''It’s [[iatrogenic]]''': Because the provider’s primary interest is its annuity, ''[[iatrogenics|the cure tends, in practice, to be worse than the disease]]''. | ||
*'''It’s expensive''': Every participant is in it to make a turn. | *'''It’s expensive''': Every participant is in it to make a turn. Their interest is in ''participating'', and ''making a turn'' first, and only then in the “desired outcome”. | ||
*'''It’s inflexible''': | *'''It’s inflexible''': Its [[proprietary]] nature means [[reg tech]] tends to be tightly controlled, top-down managed and targeted ''abstractly'' at a ''perceived'' demand and an ''anticipated'' future state,<ref>[[Thought leader]]s are no better at predicting the future of [[Legal services delivery|legal services]] than they have been at anything else.</ref> neither of which will neatly address the exact problem a ''specific'' user is trying to solve as that problem develops. Therefore [[reg tech]], requires continual maintenance. And maintenance means ''rent''. | ||
*'''It’s prone to obsolescence''': Being high-maintenance makes it innately prone to [[planned obsolescence|unplanned obsolescence]]. The future imagined by [[thought leader]]s of the [[reg tech]] space was forged in the ''past''. As with other imagined futures in the past — flying cars, self-cleaning tablecloths, colonisation of Mars — predicting the future is hard. The answer is not to try: to leave the architecture open to users to imagine as they go.<ref>The internet was revolutionary because it imagined ''no'' future, but left that — and continues to leave it, right? — to users.</ref> But “leaving everything to the user” doesn’t leave a [[rentier capitalist]] much to do, so rent-seeking businesses constrain their businesses, requiring paid-for development, and consigning themselves to ultimate [[obsolescence]]. | *'''It’s prone to obsolescence''': Being high-maintenance makes it innately prone to [[planned obsolescence|unplanned obsolescence]]. The future imagined by [[thought leader]]s of the [[reg tech]] space was forged in the ''past''. As with other imagined futures in the past — flying cars, self-cleaning tablecloths, colonisation of Mars — predicting the future is hard. The answer is not to try: to leave the architecture open to users to imagine as they go.<ref>The internet was revolutionary because it imagined ''no'' future, but left that — and continues to leave it, right? — to users.</ref> But “leaving everything to the user” doesn’t leave a [[rentier capitalist]] much to do, so rent-seeking businesses constrain their businesses, requiring paid-for development, and consigning themselves to ultimate [[obsolescence]]. | ||
*'''It’s prone to competition''': To treat what should be a ''utility'' as a ''profit opportunity'' exposes you to another source of obsolescence. ''Competition''. How can you know ''your'' platform will be ''the'' platform? How do you keep that position once you’ve got it? ''Friends Reunited'' ring a bell? | *'''It’s prone to competition''': To treat what should be a ''utility'' as a ''profit opportunity'' exposes you to another source of obsolescence. ''Competition''. How can you know ''your'' platform will be ''the'' platform? How do you keep that position once you’ve got it? ''Friends Reunited'' ring a bell? | ||