Also, as for your claim that "works fills the available time", what about competition, new models of billing(fixed-fee), etc ?
This could be a good example of advancements creating more work. My firm does a ton of employment law advising. My coworker in that department is always bitching about HR workers in her clients organization making dumb legal choices on their own. This software is designed for that sort of thing. The HR drones will instead use this software instead of their intuition. And I'm willing to bet this drives legal work when the HR drones run into issues that aren't clear (much of the law has no clear answer). Before the HR people wouldn't even know they had a legal issue to talk about.
Nobody was ever paying 500 dollars an hour to a firm to ask general compliance questions. In fact, compliance work is generally not considered legal work. They had an HR person making their choices before, not a lawyer.
Though I think my firm sometimes prepare best practice guides for clients. I'm not entirely sure if they are paying it, but I suspect they do. So maybe that software would reduce that sort of work.
>Also, as for your claim that "works fills the available time", what about competition, new models of billing(fixed-fee), etc ?
You'd think it would have a bigger impact, but we see this in many industries over a long time. Clothing got cheaper, and now we own a lot more clothes.
It's really shocking how much lawyers get away with charging based on how many unemployed and underemployed lawyers there are. I think it's partially because a lawyer is only worth something when they are experienced, and unemployed lawyers never get experience.
but also the value of legal work is really hard to objectively value. I can't even tell if the quality of work actually pays real world dividends.
As i understand , it lets lawyers decode their logic/thinking into the software, so you get more than a best-practice guide(assuming best practice guides are like what we have in software) - because to build a full best practice guide that includes all the corner cases and the fine details, etc is just not practical(too much to read, you'll need an expert anyway).
But once you can gather information from the client(in a branching logic kind of way), you can create detailed advice that's very focused to the client's exact problem, and that usually offer much higher value - if you do it well.
>> (much of the law has no clear answer)
So many decisions in law are probability based ? the lawyer knows that doing X has 90% chance of being OK and 10% of being not OK (roughly) depending on corner cases or how laws will be interpreted in the future, etc - and builds a plan upon that, taking risks into account ?
Because maybe neota supports probabilistic logic, not sure. But for example i know some medical expert system software do us that.
>> Clothing got cheaper, and now we own a lot more clothes.
We probably consume more of most things, and yet employment in some sectors decreased.
>> I can't even tell if the quality of work actually pays real world dividends.
So selling is key. And probably risk reduction is key.Right ?
Computers have a pretty good track record doing risky stuff in a safer way and handling complexity, because humans make mistakes, and are limited with regards to complexity. It could be a big selling point once legal software matures.
