• Robert Ritchie#CommentAvatarLabel Commented on: 2017-11-04T21:54:06.353

    Not even those as omniscient as the Law Society can predict future technologies and their effects: only the future effects of current technologies assuming stagnation. This was drummed into me years ago when studying statistical forecasting and mathematical modelling techniques - the most obvious and dramatic example being the way the contraceptive pill wrecked so much macroeconomic planning in the two decades following the mid-1960s. Five-year projections are thus nonsense unless technology doesn't change: twenty-year projections to 2038 are not so much nonsense as utterly pointless. Why waste your breath?

    That said, litigation employment could increase by an order of magnitude faster than ever seen before, to which the contribution of Brexit may be insignificant. At least, that's a foreseeable outcome of technology towards which I'm working... which methodologically might be at least as good an indicator as putting your finger in the air.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report comment

    Vote upYou have already voted0Vote downYou have already voted0
  • Anonymous#CommentAvatarLabel Commented on: 2017-11-03T21:47:56.480

    I learned to touch type when I was 16 so I always used a computer, from when I began practicing in 1983. My older brother told me to take a course in secretarial typing because I would have to type up term paper at university. As a lawyer, I was able to turn work around in a fraction of the time my colleagues could, who relied exclusively on secretaries to type up pleadings. As the profession moved towards computerisation, I watched with amusement as my colleagues were given computers to use and were typing with two fingers. I would ruminate about anyone could think they could travel on the "information superhighway" on which we all now operate without the basic skills necessary to the journey, anymore than they would think they could travel down the M4 on a tricycle.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report comment

    Vote upYou have already voted6Vote downYou have already voted2
  • Tony Hatfield#CommentAvatarLabel Commented on: 2017-11-03T15:15:58.450

    Signigicant=significant....sorry for typo.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report comment

    Vote upYou have already voted0Vote downYou have already voted1
  • Tony Hatfield#CommentAvatarLabel Commented on: 2017-11-03T15:14:17.510

    James
    But if you look at the stats I referred to yesterday, its clear AI/IT based systems are already making a signigicant difference.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report comment

    Vote upYou have already voted2Vote downYou have already voted3
  • James Bowers#CommentAvatarLabel Commented on: 2017-11-03T14:21:39.287

    article is rubbish - I am so bored by all this stuff on AI - it will make no difference whatsoever to legal practice

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report comment

    Vote upYou have already voted5Vote downYou have already voted5
  • Tony Hatfield#CommentAvatarLabel Commented on: 2017-11-02T16:41:49.760

    On Table 1 Page 11 there is ample evidence that staff has
    already been replaced with automated/IT based systems. http://www.lawsociety.org.uk/Support-services/Research-trends/documents/legal-services-sector-forecasts-2017/

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report comment

    Vote upYou have already voted2Vote downYou have already voted1
  • Anonymous#CommentAvatarLabel Commented on: 2017-11-02T15:37:52.980

    That this news comes hot on the heels of "Warning as number of solicitors tops 140,000" and the introduction of the SQE as a means to open the profession to a broader demographic is particularly concerning.

    Has anyone told the law schools?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report comment

    Vote upYou have already voted48Vote downYou have already voted2
  • Ian Newbery#CommentAvatarLabel Commented on: 2017-11-02T15:36:35.367

    The Law Society previously said that its Veyo conveyancing system was what everyone wanted, and threw £7 million down the pan, before pulling the chain and admitting it was wrong.
    With such a track record how can they go wrong?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report comment

    Vote upYou have already voted53Vote downYou have already voted0
  • David Swingler#CommentAvatarLabel Commented on: 2017-11-02T14:37:59.123

    Automation is doing really well at Nottingham Mags court today!.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report comment

    Vote upYou have already voted32Vote downYou have already voted1
  • Anonymous#CommentAvatarLabel Commented on: 2017-11-02T12:40:55.100

    I don't get it. The Law Society is meant to represent its' members interests.

    Fine, there is a potential issue coming. SO WHAT ARE THEY GOING TO DO ABOUT IT?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report comment

    Vote upYou have already voted81Vote downYou have already voted9