I can’t say I deeply understood the 10 page paper. Presumably makers of legal software will get feedback from the market which while imperfect, will pick winners and losers. Software in a nonprofit A2J context will be more reliant on organizations maintaining it.
"If there’s a storm coming, we’re not very ready for it. In a world of imperfect tools, imperfect developers, and imperfect users how do we avoid an epidemic of bad legal software?"
[The paper @QSteenhuis and I wrote for the upcoming AI & Law conference.]
http://www.capstonepractice.com/s/Substantive-Legal-Software-Quality-A-Gathering-Storm.pdf …
-
-
-
Substantive legal app quality is not a problem easily solved by market. Consumers can't judge on their own. (True for non-
#robotlawyers too). Solving#A2J gap with quality will require solutions that work in for/non-profit contexts and don't stifle innovation. - 4 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks for the link. As per your “arms merchant” analogy, in law the “market” tends to encourage, rather than limit, the proliferation of infernal innovations. Folks seek arms that offer them more power (even at the cost of more collateral damage), while others respond in kind.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.