Web-Tones

Legal Professional Services: A Blood Sport?

Link: Adam Smith, Esq.: An inquiry into the economics of law firms..... Yes the PSF landscape is becoming even "dicier" with enabling technologies now allowing boutiques to compete more effectively with BIG LAW--there is simply very little (in any) by way of technology infrastructure advantage that bigger firms have over the nimble and the smart. A "blood sport" is an apt description and there is no end to the "blood letting" in sight.

Let the games begin...

Darwin or pre-existing wiring?

Link: Rough Type: Nicholas Carr's Blog: Rewiring the mind. I don't by the argument that the web is "messing with our brains." Sure, our behavior is changing with respect to how we use information in this medium as opposed to other mediums, but it is not because something fundamental is changing at a cognitive level, but rather that something fundamental is being re-awakened.

Yeah it's a post-post modern world (whatever that means) but it is all too easy to call something "new." We are processing information faster/different because that is all the bandwidth that we have to deal with it. This is not much different from processing information at 70-80 miles per hour, at rush hour, while driving on our favorite metro loop. Also, not all that much different than what hunter/gatherers did when trying to find food for the "family dinner." In short, you/them/us did not have the luxury to process information in any sort of "reflective manner" (you study long you study wrong and junior goes to bed hungry) but rather you literally had hundreds (if not more) of decisions to make in a relatively short period of time.

The wiring to do this has been around for a very long time...

Open Source Software is Big Business

Link: Open Sources | Rodrigues & Urlocker | InfoWorld | Sun Shines on LAMP | January 16, 2008 05:40 AM | By Zack Urlocker. If anyone doubts that OSS is big business than they should pay attention to this announcement. Sun is not doing this because they are "nice guys" but rather they perceive this as potentially "game changing."

The question, from a legal technology perspective, is whether law tech vendors will adopt the LAMP architecture any time soon? I predict that the answer to this is a definitive YES! Why? For the same reason that Sun is going to buy MySQL. Someone in the law tech crowd will figure out that there is a potentially game changing play to be made on top of LAMP--provide the software for FREE and make money on support and other related services.

This is too obvious a play so as to go unnoticed for very long. The big incumbents are not the likely candidates, but a well entrenched small player might make the move.

Digital uniqueness or settled criminal law?

Link: Rough Type: Nicholas Carr's Blog: Is encryption a right?. Indeed this case will be an interesting one to watch, because while the "digerati" like to see many issues in a new "cyber legal light" the truth is that many old doctrines are controlling, the "cyber" nature of the legal issue is simply a new application of settled doctrine. This case in particular should shed some light on whether or not the "digital issue" is "new."

Open Source Education?

Link: Michael Geist - Why Is There No Canadian MIT?. There is something fascinating (and important) with respect to what MIT (and the consortium) is doing vis-a-vis higher education. It is called "accessibility" to the masses. The dissemination of knowledge, and the rate by which it is being disseminated, could be what makes (or breaks) some nation states in the 21 century. Don't believe me, just see who is following MIT's lead--China of course, and India and the rest of the developing world are soon to follow. Why? Because the rules of the game have changed (again) and these countries are seizing the opportunity. Thank God that MIT is right here in the good 'ole USA, because where there is no vision, the people (eventually) perish...

Victor Hugo (I think) once said: "if you build more schools then you can build less prisons." We should be investing heavily in education, but instead our politics is still dominated by the type of thinking that leads more toward prisons and less toward education. To borrow from JFK: "progress is a nice words but progress has its enemies."

Legal Marketing Wisdom!

Link: Build A Solo Practice, LLC: "Tip of the Week" (II) - How Creativity Will Save the (Legal Marketing) World. This post is actually more profound than what might initially be apparent. Why? Because lawyers appear to be much too conservative in how they approach marketing. Sure you need to stay on the right side of the PR rules (and pay attention specifically to what your state bar says about advertising) but that does not mean that you should not be inviting the dragons over.

There is ample evidence (anecdotal) that law school kills creativity. Not only are most law students not well grounded in basic business concepts (i.e. marketing) they are instilled with fear because of all the war stories they hear about (and are taught). That means that very few "get marketing." That is the very reason why you should be inspired to do it, in as creative a way as you can imagine, short of crossing the bright line rules and ethical considerations (the latter is simply bad business and the former will get you disbarred). The problem lies in the fact that most attorneys stay to far away from the bright lines that they leave huge opportunities for those that are willing to dance with the dragons!

Taking on Google?

Link: The Next Google Search Challenger: Blekko. It is clear that there is still plenty of room for innovation in Search, but it is a lot less clear, if/when the innovation occurs that it is: 1) compelling enough to unseat Google; or 2) cannot be replicated by Google, even if it takes a ton of money to do so. Maybe the play here is that Google buys these guys? Many people took on MS and failed. Google won by inventing an entirely new category, same as MS won over IBM.

I don't believe that there is any examples of a dominant company (in recent history) that was unseated by an upstart in a domain where it is dominant. That obviously does not mean that it is not possible, but I would certainly not bet on it.

TV is Dead!

OK, maybe it just has its big toe in the grave, I mean, I will probably still watch some football today, and maybe catch the weather on the evening news. BUT, definitely, "the beginning of the end has reached a new milestone."

Why? Because after two years of the worst kind of TV commercialism on display,i.e. watching the "ball drop in NY" on any channel, I am done (sort of). I will NEVER watch that shit again, EVER! Is it just me or do the airhead hosts just get more banal every year? The artist(s) selected to perform (this year's "teeny bopper" pop heros), turn in, without fail, the most "unmemorable uninspired performances"--despite the fact that  this "old man" does recognize some of  the tunes and did not particularly despise the artist prior to New Year's Eve.

Is it just that I am grumpy from not haven't slept enough? Nah. TV is dying a death of 1000 cuts. I mean, when was the last time you remember CNN (or anybody else) have "breaking news?" When is the last time you can remember watching a TV show and not thinking that, in terms of minutes, you watched at least as many commercials?

OK, OK, I admit to NEVER being a big TV fan, but what I use to avoid I am now starting to hate (TV is a "thing" and therefore hating it does not offend my Christian sensibilities)! At least with the Net, there are 50 million channels and the odds are that you can find something "ON!"