|
|
|
|
|
|
by igurari
4314 days ago
|
|
|
>I was enticed by the idea of running a software business myself, and making organic, creative decisions. This quote resonates with me because it describes my own flight from the law. On a day-to-day basis, the practice of law is relatively non-creative, rote and ultimately dull, at least when compared to technology and programming. The law just moves so slowly. When programming, thinking about the development of a product, or even running a company, I can explore a dozen or more creative and complex ideas in a day. I also experience feelings of success (and failure) every single day. Litigation doesn’t permit that. The anticipation and excitement of successes and failures are fewer and further in between — even that they can be very big and rewarding when they occur. The author’s description of dealing with judges and attorneys in New York state court are disappointing. The law has structure and my vision is to map it out with sufficient detail and accuracy that we can put it on “rails,” the way most people assume it works when discussing “the rule of law.” Robolawyer will never be in the cards but it should usually be clear what laws are at issue, what arguments are relevant, and how the balance of past cases have applied those laws to particular sets of facts. Mapping out the law means we can guide reasoning along well worn paths, make it easier to express the logic of the law, and thereby shame “terse, incoherent one paragraph opinion[s]” out of existence. |
|
|
What makes you think that any other city or state is any different? I've heard a few stories about Oregon that make me think it's pretty much the same here.
I think people would be very wise to avoid lawsuits unless they have a very very strong case. And even then be prepared to lose or to litigate for years.
It's a lot messier than engineering.