←back to thread

On Building Git for Lawyers

(jordanbryan.substack.com)
162 points jpbryan | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
1-more ◴[] No.42138302[source]
Reporting back from my biglaw pal I sent this to:

> Big flaw in the product: 60 year old partner who still makes hand edits and has the Secretary scan the pages and send them out of order to the associate

> Second big flaw in the product: specialists edits get rejected because they don’t know the deal points and are just swooping in

I took issue with this as step 4 seems to involve an M&A lawyer accepting/rejecting specialist edits piecemeal, to which he responded "Right, but that doesn’t actually save that much time. It’s the same work that an M&A associate is already doing"

> Third big flaw in the product: big law firms are the least innovative organizations on earth

> Fourth big flaw in the product: having junior associates do menial tasks at $800-950/hr is a feature, not a bug, of law firm business model. So you are solving for something that the target customer doesn’t necessarily want solved.

and there it is :/

replies(5): >>42138455 #>>42138510 #>>42138555 #>>42138584 #>>42160003 #
1. cduzz ◴[] No.42138584[source]
Regarding point 4 --

Sometimes you automate something because you want to do it faster / cheaper. Sometimes you automate something because you need it to be done _correctly_.

I would much rather my critical but menial $900/hr task be done by someone double-checking automated work than the same amount of time being spent doing the menial work.

You could even introduce flaws (in the review step) to catch if you're concerned about the human getting bored and just automatically mashing the "merge" button...

There was a freakonomics[1] podcast about mechanical support of human activities...

[1] https://freakonomics.com/podcast/new-technologies-always-sca...