Comment we have more in common than you think (Score 1) 328
I probably lost my authority to speak as a techie years ago when I changed my major from math to theatre. But as a current lawyer who at least tries to maintain in interest in things technical, I thought I'd point out at least a few of the similarities between the two fields that are not immediately obvious.
I believe that many lawyers / coders operate from a similar mindset. Both are faced with a system which provides (supposedly) fixed boundaries. It is the job of both to engage in a creative thought process, designed to accomplish things within those boundaries which were not thought possible.
In the case of a programmer, thouse boundaries are set by the specifications of the system for which he or she is coding. For the attorney, the boundaries are set by legislatures, precedents, the judge, and the opposing counsel. For each the task is to maximize the result given the condition under which he or she must operate.
The law is not a body of literature which can be memorized and regurgitated to settle the claims of any given case, any more than I could turn myself into a world class programmer simply by learning all of the possible syntax for a given programming language. Both programming and the law are processes which represent the creative application of acquired knowledge in new situations, and the art of working within constraints imposed by forces which you can't control.
I also want to emphasize that knowledge of the law, and legal education prepare one to be a lawyer, but they do not lend any magical authority in philosophical discussions regarding what the law should be. How the law should develop, especially in technologically related areas is an area where techies should have much more involvement, because the legislators who are writing the laws frequently have no idea what the long term consequences of their actions will be.
There really need not be the techie / lawyer gap which seems to pervade the postings in this topic. Lawyers and programmers are employed because they know how to use a given system to reach a given result for their client. I could tell you how my software 'should' operate, but it is going to take a techie to get it to work that way. You can tell me what the result 'should' be in your legal case, but having a lawyer working with you will greatly increase you chances of bringing that result about .
Creative problem solving within limits is the core of both good lawyering and good coding. We have more in common than you think.
Hack the Law!
Dane Torbenson
I believe that many lawyers / coders operate from a similar mindset. Both are faced with a system which provides (supposedly) fixed boundaries. It is the job of both to engage in a creative thought process, designed to accomplish things within those boundaries which were not thought possible.
In the case of a programmer, thouse boundaries are set by the specifications of the system for which he or she is coding. For the attorney, the boundaries are set by legislatures, precedents, the judge, and the opposing counsel. For each the task is to maximize the result given the condition under which he or she must operate.
The law is not a body of literature which can be memorized and regurgitated to settle the claims of any given case, any more than I could turn myself into a world class programmer simply by learning all of the possible syntax for a given programming language. Both programming and the law are processes which represent the creative application of acquired knowledge in new situations, and the art of working within constraints imposed by forces which you can't control.
I also want to emphasize that knowledge of the law, and legal education prepare one to be a lawyer, but they do not lend any magical authority in philosophical discussions regarding what the law should be. How the law should develop, especially in technologically related areas is an area where techies should have much more involvement, because the legislators who are writing the laws frequently have no idea what the long term consequences of their actions will be.
There really need not be the techie / lawyer gap which seems to pervade the postings in this topic. Lawyers and programmers are employed because they know how to use a given system to reach a given result for their client. I could tell you how my software 'should' operate, but it is going to take a techie to get it to work that way. You can tell me what the result 'should' be in your legal case, but having a lawyer working with you will greatly increase you chances of bringing that result about .
Creative problem solving within limits is the core of both good lawyering and good coding. We have more in common than you think.
Hack the Law!
Dane Torbenson
