82,891
edits
Change adoption: 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 2: | Line 2: | ||
[[File:Blackberry.jpg|450px|frameless|center]] | [[File:Blackberry.jpg|450px|frameless|center]] | ||
}}{{quote| | }}{{quote| | ||
''DR. JOHNSON'': (to George) So, tell me, sir, what words particularly interested you? <br> | |||
PRINCE GEORGE: Oh, er, nothing… Anything, really, you know… <br> | ''PRINCE GEORGE'': Oh, er, nothing… Anything, really, you know… <br> | ||
JOHNSON: Ah, I see you’ve underlined a few: “bloomers”; “bottom”; “burp”; (''with increasing outrage'') “fart”; “fiddle”; “FORNICATE”? Sir! I hope you’re not using the first English dictionary to look up rude words! | ''DR. JOHNSON'': Ah, I see you’ve underlined a few: “bloomers”; “bottom”; “burp”; (''with increasing outrage'') “fart”; “fiddle”; “FORNICATE”? Sir! I hope you’re not using the first English dictionary to ''look up rude words''! <br> | ||
BLACKADDER: I wouldn’t be too hopeful; that’s what all the other ones will be used for. | ''BLACKADDER'': I wouldn’t be too hopeful; that’s what all the other ones will be used for. | ||
:— Blackadder, ''Ink and Incapability''}} | :— Blackadder, ''Ink and Incapability''}} | ||
An observation which owns something to {{author|Peter Thiel}}’s excellent {{br|Zero to One: Notes on Startups, or How to Build the Future}}, we hypothesise that for any [[Meatsack|user]] to adopt new technology, it must immediately or, at any rate, ''quickly'' and within easy reach of that user’s [[Adjacent possible|imagination horizon]] — make that user’s life incontestably better. | |||
It is the [[JC]]’s firm contention that we, and certainly our [[thought leader]]s, systematically discount the significance of innovation that has already bedded into the market. This is the only possible explanation for the widespread conviction that the legal market has not innovated in the last 30 years. Why? well, our cynical view that once bedded-down, its glamour, novelty, potential efficiency and monetisability is gone: it ceases to be an ''opportunity'' and starts to be ''furniture''. | It is the [[JC]]’s firm contention that we, and certainly our [[thought leader]]s, systematically discount the significance of innovation that has already bedded into the market. This is the only possible explanation for the widespread conviction that the legal market has not innovated in the last 30 years. Why? well, our cynical view that once bedded-down, its glamour, novelty, potential efficiency and monetisability is gone: it ceases to be an ''opportunity'' and starts to be ''furniture''. | ||