2023 Vault/Firsthand Rankings Forum

[Anonymous User]

“V3” is an obvious troll, and if you didn’t spot that immediately, you should not be working in the V100.

[Anonymous User]

I love how tech people go on Blind to have a pissing contest with their TC, throwing out numbers like $250K-350K (many of who are younger than us btw).

And we're just sitting here debating whether LW is more selective than KE. Tech people would think we're mental, and they wouldn't be wrong.

[BrainsyK]

I love how tech people go on Blind to have a pissing contest with their TC, throwing out numbers like $250K-350K (many of who are younger than us btw).

And we're just sitting here debating whether LW is more selective than KE. Tech people would think we're mental, and they wouldn't be wrong.

https://www.teamblind.com/post/Google-i ... G-s4Q7HkVG
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Which-of ... s-No3fYtys
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Most-pre ... d-QQsSMtvT
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Most-pre ... d-BBu15TXU
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Which-is ... s-8Zhk43Ro
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Whats-th ... y-TvLdF2KP

I also saw one that was what's the most prestigious stakeholder yesterday.

[Anonymous User]

I love how tech people go on Blind to have a pissing contest with their TC, throwing out numbers like $250K-350K (many of who are younger than us btw).

And we're just sitting here debating whether LW is more selective than KE. Tech people would think we're mental, and they wouldn't be wrong.

https://www.teamblind.com/post/Google-i ... G-s4Q7HkVG
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Which-of ... s-No3fYtys
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Most-pre ... d-QQsSMtvT
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Most-pre ... d-BBu15TXU
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Which-is ... s-8Zhk43Ro
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Whats-th ... y-TvLdF2KP

I also saw one that was what's the most prestigious stakeholder yesterday.

Half that TC isn't liquid. This was hashed out a while back on here, but roughly speaking it's in the same ballpark depending on if you're KJD or not and most would take the liquidity of all cash now

[Anonymous User]

“V3” is an obvious troll, and if you didn’t spot that immediately, you should not be working in the V100.

CSM/SC want to think they are above the v10, but are NOT special

[Anonymous User]

I love how tech people go on Blind to have a pissing contest with their TC, throwing out numbers like $250K-350K (many of who are younger than us btw).

And we're just sitting here debating whether LW is more selective than KE. Tech people would think we're mental, and they wouldn't be wrong.

https://www.teamblind.com/post/Google-i ... G-s4Q7HkVG
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Which-of ... s-No3fYtys
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Most-pre ... d-QQsSMtvT
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Most-pre ... d-BBu15TXU
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Which-is ... s-8Zhk43Ro
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Whats-th ... y-TvLdF2KP

I also saw one that was what's the most prestigious stakeholder yesterday.

Have you even read the comments? Most of them tie prestige with salary.

And here we are tieing prestige with a one-year's worth of a legal "education" GPA by people who wash out in 2-3 years lmao.

[Anonymous User]

I love how tech people go on Blind to have a pissing contest with their TC, throwing out numbers like $250K-350K (many of who are younger than us btw).

And we're just sitting here debating whether LW is more selective than KE. Tech people would think we're mental, and they wouldn't be wrong.

https://www.teamblind.com/post/Google-i ... G-s4Q7HkVG
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Which-of ... s-No3fYtys
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Most-pre ... d-QQsSMtvT
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Most-pre ... d-BBu15TXU
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Which-is ... s-8Zhk43Ro
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Whats-th ... y-TvLdF2KP

I also saw one that was what's the most prestigious stakeholder yesterday.

Half that TC isn't liquid. This was hashed out a while back on here, but roughly speaking it's in the same ballpark depending on if you're KJD or not and most would take the liquidity of all cash now

You're off the mark. Tech has no debt, no tuition, and pays more than in-house. We don't choose the legal career cause it pays more than tech, we choose it cause we can't succeed in tech. Which is why we end up in a pissing contest over preftige lmao.

[Anonymous User]

I love how tech people go on Blind to have a pissing contest with their TC, throwing out numbers like $250K-350K (many of who are younger than us btw).

And we're just sitting here debating whether LW is more selective than KE. Tech people would think we're mental, and they wouldn't be wrong.

https://www.teamblind.com/post/Google-i ... G-s4Q7HkVG
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Which-of ... s-No3fYtys
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Most-pre ... d-QQsSMtvT
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Most-pre ... d-BBu15TXU
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Which-is ... s-8Zhk43Ro
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Whats-th ... y-TvLdF2KP

I also saw one that was what's the most prestigious stakeholder yesterday.

Half that TC isn't liquid. This was hashed out a while back on here, but roughly speaking it's in the same ballpark depending on if you're KJD or not and most would take the liquidity of all cash now

You're off the mark. Tech has no debt, no tuition, and pays more than in-house. We don't choose the legal career cause it pays more than tech, we choose it cause we can't succeed in tech. Which is why we end up in a pissing contest over preftige lmao.

I've worked in finance, law, and adjacent to tech people. Law is the best by far if you have anything approaching ideas. Tech is 99.9% code monkeys who were good enough at their TTT ug's CS program to get paid base level salaries for the rest of their lives. Finance has even more of a washout culture than law. Law, if you play it right (i.e. get a scholarship at a school that will let you go to biglaw, then don't burn out before you're a midlevel), is far more lucrative.

[Anonymous User]

I love how tech people go on Blind to have a pissing contest with their TC, throwing out numbers like $250K-350K (many of who are younger than us btw).

And we're just sitting here debating whether LW is more selective than KE. Tech people would think we're mental, and they wouldn't be wrong.

https://www.teamblind.com/post/Google-i ... G-s4Q7HkVG
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Which-of ... s-No3fYtys
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Most-pre ... d-QQsSMtvT
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Most-pre ... d-BBu15TXU
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Which-is ... s-8Zhk43Ro
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Whats-th ... y-TvLdF2KP

I also saw one that was what's the most prestigious stakeholder yesterday.

Half that TC isn't liquid. This was hashed out a while back on here, but roughly speaking it's in the same ballpark depending on if you're KJD or not and most would take the liquidity of all cash now

You're off the mark. Tech has no debt, no tuition, and pays more than in-house. We don't choose the legal career cause it pays more than tech, we choose it cause we can't succeed in tech. Which is why we end up in a pissing contest over preftige lmao.

1. Law has more inherent prestige than tech
2. If you can get equity, or even a solid non-equity partnership, TC on average will be better (e.g., I'd rather pull down a cool 1MM as a non-equity partnership than whatever stock deferral bull they will swing on me in tech, though no denying that may pay off)

[Anonymous User]

I love how tech people go on Blind to have a pissing contest with their TC, throwing out numbers like $250K-350K (many of who are younger than us btw).

And we're just sitting here debating whether LW is more selective than KE. Tech people would think we're mental, and they wouldn't be wrong.

https://www.teamblind.com/post/Google-i ... G-s4Q7HkVG
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Which-of ... s-No3fYtys
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Most-pre ... d-QQsSMtvT
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Most-pre ... d-BBu15TXU
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Which-is ... s-8Zhk43Ro
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Whats-th ... y-TvLdF2KP

I also saw one that was what's the most prestigious stakeholder yesterday.

Great post. Most professions have this kind of debate. Doctors compare career paths and hospitals, military compares units / occupations / awards, consultants have MBB and their own vault stupidity, accountants have the big 4, banking has the bulge brackets, engineers have their own prestige ideas, and so do software engineers etc. Lawyers may be more extreme, but we are still inside the ballpark.

And in regards to "TC" comparisons, the real question is the ratio of risk / reward of your lifetime expected earnings, like a personal net present value of lifetime earnings combined with a sharpe ratio. Big law lawyers do very well in this regard. Due to extremely high barriers to entry, the difficulty of switching fields, restrictions on non-lawyers doing legal work, and the confidentiality of the work, lawyers have lower financial risks than other professions, except gov work and maybe doctors. Software folks are having a good time now, but there are few barriers to competition in the field and the tech market needs change like the wind. Their lifetime comp will be lower and more uncertain.

Now, it's true that the big law total lifetime comp is not the same as a hedge fund manager, an entrepreneur who strikes it big, or maybe even some types of bankers. And if that's what you want, go and do that. But the hedge fund manager / entrepreneur risk is higher than the big law career path and good luck having the contacts and luck needed to do those jobs. Overall, assuming you enjoy the job and the people, we have it good.

[Anonymous User]

I love how tech people go on Blind to have a pissing contest with their TC, throwing out numbers like $250K-350K (many of who are younger than us btw).

And we're just sitting here debating whether LW is more selective than KE. Tech people would think we're mental, and they wouldn't be wrong.

https://www.teamblind.com/post/Google-i ... G-s4Q7HkVG
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Which-of ... s-No3fYtys
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Most-pre ... d-QQsSMtvT
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Most-pre ... d-BBu15TXU
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Which-is ... s-8Zhk43Ro
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Whats-th ... y-TvLdF2KP

I also saw one that was what's the most prestigious stakeholder yesterday.

Half that TC isn't liquid. This was hashed out a while back on here, but roughly speaking it's in the same ballpark depending on if you're KJD or not and most would take the liquidity of all cash now

You're off the mark. Tech has no debt, no tuition, and pays more than in-house. We don't choose the legal career cause it pays more than tech, we choose it cause we can't succeed in tech. Which is why we end up in a pissing contest over preftige lmao.

Crazy. Tech = modern-day engineers. People choose not to work in tech for the same reason they chose not to become an engineer. They find the work boring and the people boring. (No knock on tech, lawyers are not everyone's cup of tea).

Pissing contests are human nature and are not all bad. At least they show people care about being the best. If your profession doesn't have pissing contests you are likely a) not in a profession, or b) in a dying profession.

[Anonymous User]

“V3” is an obvious troll, and if you didn’t spot that immediately, you should not be working in the V100.

CSM/SC want to think they are above the v10, but are NOT special

Agreed, both tremendously overrated. Yes, Cravath will always get credit for its incredible historical importance in establishing modern BigLaw. But these days it’s just another bog standard V10 with a limited geographic footprint, and the accomplishments it had 50+ years ago don’t magically change that. Respectable, successful, but in no way a tier above the next 10 firms.

Same with S&C except they don’t even have the historical relevance. To this day I’ve never had anyone explain to me why I should give a shit about them more than any other V10, other than S&C people constantly talking about how special they are because they’re special, because they’re special.

[Anonymous User]

1. Law has more inherent prestige than tech

This is so so so subjective. There are tons of people who think lawyers are scum and plenty of others who think "tech" means being the next Zuckerberg/Musk/Bezos.

[Anonymous User]

I love how tech people go on Blind to have a pissing contest with their TC, throwing out numbers like $250K-350K (many of who are younger than us btw).

And we're just sitting here debating whether LW is more selective than KE. Tech people would think we're mental, and they wouldn't be wrong.

https://www.teamblind.com/post/Google-i ... G-s4Q7HkVG
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Which-of ... s-No3fYtys
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Most-pre ... d-QQsSMtvT
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Most-pre ... d-BBu15TXU
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Which-is ... s-8Zhk43Ro
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Whats-th ... y-TvLdF2KP

I also saw one that was what's the most prestigious stakeholder yesterday.

Half that TC isn't liquid. This was hashed out a while back on here, but roughly speaking it's in the same ballpark depending on if you're KJD or not and most would take the liquidity of all cash now

You're off the mark. Tech has no debt, no tuition, and pays more than in-house. We don't choose the legal career cause it pays more than tech, we choose it cause we can't succeed in tech. Which is why we end up in a pissing contest over preftige lmao.

Crazy. Tech = modern-day engineers. People choose not to work in tech for the same reason they chose not to become an engineer. They find the work boring and the people boring. (No knock on tech, lawyers are not everyone's cup of tea).

Pissing contests are human nature and are not all bad. At least they show people care about being the best. If your profession doesn't have pissing contests you are likely a) not in a profession, or b) in a dying profession.

Pissing contests in it of themselves aren't bad. But it's kinda nuts to justify a pissing contest over preftige, especially LW vs KE. Who cares? Most people wash out in a few years anyways.

The tech vs law debate is tired, and it's no surprise lawyers are going to fall for the sour grapes trope for most of the points regarding TC. But it's also telling when lawyers have to point to barrier of entry rather than skill or intelligence to argue their compensation is safer. If anything, the ALSP market is growing, calls for replacing or dismantling the bar outright are growing, and I'd wager most of the legal work (transactional and litigation) is under threat by advancements in tech. So no, I don't think the legal profession offers higher or safer lifetime compensation.

[Anonymous User]

I love how tech people go on Blind to have a pissing contest with their TC, throwing out numbers like $250K-350K (many of who are younger than us btw).

And we're just sitting here debating whether LW is more selective than KE. Tech people would think we're mental, and they wouldn't be wrong.

https://www.teamblind.com/post/Google-i ... G-s4Q7HkVG
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Which-of ... s-No3fYtys
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Most-pre ... d-QQsSMtvT
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Most-pre ... d-BBu15TXU
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Which-is ... s-8Zhk43Ro
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Whats-th ... y-TvLdF2KP

I also saw one that was what's the most prestigious stakeholder yesterday.

Half that TC isn't liquid. This was hashed out a while back on here, but roughly speaking it's in the same ballpark depending on if you're KJD or not and most would take the liquidity of all cash now

You're off the mark. Tech has no debt, no tuition, and pays more than in-house. We don't choose the legal career cause it pays more than tech, we choose it cause we can't succeed in tech. Which is why we end up in a pissing contest over preftige lmao.

Crazy. Tech = modern-day engineers. People choose not to work in tech for the same reason they chose not to become an engineer. They find the work boring and the people boring. (No knock on tech, lawyers are not everyone's cup of tea).

Pissing contests are human nature and are not all bad. At least they show people care about being the best. If your profession doesn't have pissing contests you are likely a) not in a profession, or b) in a dying profession.

Pissing contests in it of themselves aren't bad. But it's kinda nuts to justify a pissing contest over preftige, especially LW vs KE. Who cares? Most people wash out in a few years anyways.

The tech vs law debate is tired, and it's no surprise lawyers are going to fall for the sour grapes trope for most of the points regarding TC. But it's also telling when lawyers have to point to barrier of entry rather than skill or intelligence to argue their compensation is safer. If anything, the ALSP market is growing, calls for replacing or dismantling the bar outright are growing, and I'd wager most of the legal work (transactional and litigation) is under threat by advancements in tech. So no, I don't think the legal profession offers higher or safer lifetime compensation.

You must not actually work at a big firm and have seen how terrible the "tech" advancement to help work flow are. ALSP has no almost no impact on the types of clients v10's service

[Anonymous User]

HFs and PE learned years ago that prestige doesn’t fucking matter, only thing that matters is compensation.

Arguing otherwise is idiotic.

[Anonymous User]

HFs and PE learned years ago that prestige doesn’t fucking matter, only thing that matters is compensation.

Arguing otherwise is idiotic.

I don't really know what this means, finance is just as credentialist (see, e.g., their hiring practices both pre/post-MBA)

or someone telling you 'oh s/he works at Blackstone'

or Goldman perennially coming in slightly under 'street' on bonuses b/c of the brand halo

or people rocking their 'banker bags' with firm logos at equinox

etc

[Anonymous User]

I love how tech people go on Blind to have a pissing contest with their TC, throwing out numbers like $250K-350K (many of who are younger than us btw).

And we're just sitting here debating whether LW is more selective than KE. Tech people would think we're mental, and they wouldn't be wrong.

https://www.teamblind.com/post/Google-i ... G-s4Q7HkVG
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Which-of ... s-No3fYtys
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Most-pre ... d-QQsSMtvT
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Most-pre ... d-BBu15TXU
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Which-is ... s-8Zhk43Ro
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Whats-th ... y-TvLdF2KP

I also saw one that was what's the most prestigious stakeholder yesterday.

Half that TC isn't liquid. This was hashed out a while back on here, but roughly speaking it's in the same ballpark depending on if you're KJD or not and most would take the liquidity of all cash now

You're off the mark. Tech has no debt, no tuition, and pays more than in-house. We don't choose the legal career cause it pays more than tech, we choose it cause we can't succeed in tech. Which is why we end up in a pissing contest over preftige lmao.

Crazy. Tech = modern-day engineers. People choose not to work in tech for the same reason they chose not to become an engineer. They find the work boring and the people boring. (No knock on tech, lawyers are not everyone's cup of tea).

Pissing contests are human nature and are not all bad. At least they show people care about being the best. If your profession doesn't have pissing contests you are likely a) not in a profession, or b) in a dying profession.

Pissing contests in it of themselves aren't bad. But it's kinda nuts to justify a pissing contest over preftige, especially LW vs KE. Who cares? Most people wash out in a few years anyways.

The tech vs law debate is tired, and it's no surprise lawyers are going to fall for the sour grapes trope for most of the points regarding TC. But it's also telling when lawyers have to point to barrier of entry rather than skill or intelligence to argue their compensation is safer. If anything, the ALSP market is growing, calls for replacing or dismantling the bar outright are growing, and I'd wager most of the legal work (transactional and litigation) is under threat by advancements in tech. So no, I don't think the legal profession offers higher or safer lifetime compensation.

You must not actually work at a big firm and have seen how terrible the "tech" advancement to help work flow are. ALSP has no almost no impact on the types of clients v10's service

Having studied this a bit, there is actually a divide among BigLaw firms in the type of work they provide and how routine/commoditized it is (and how critical it is to the client, and who those clients are). There are some firms that get tons of work from fee-sensitive clients that pick firms more on price than quality and rely on high-volume lower-margin work. Those are the firms that are increasingly threatened by both tech and accounting firms.

V10s (and not just V10s, a bunch of other firms with a similar model) instead focus on high-margin work for fee-insensitive clients where quality (or at least perceived quality) matters, and price is not a primary consideration when choosing a firm. The kind of firms that are either doing work complex enough that computers can’t really help much, or that a computer could maybe handle but the client is willing to pay a human junior to be super damn sure it’s done right, or both. These firms are not threatened by tech and likely won’t be for a long time.

[Anonymous User]

I love how tech people go on Blind to have a pissing contest with their TC, throwing out numbers like $250K-350K (many of who are younger than us btw).

And we're just sitting here debating whether LW is more selective than KE. Tech people would think we're mental, and they wouldn't be wrong.

https://www.teamblind.com/post/Google-i ... G-s4Q7HkVG
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Which-of ... s-No3fYtys
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Most-pre ... d-QQsSMtvT
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Most-pre ... d-BBu15TXU
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Which-is ... s-8Zhk43Ro
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Whats-th ... y-TvLdF2KP

I also saw one that was what's the most prestigious stakeholder yesterday.

Half that TC isn't liquid. This was hashed out a while back on here, but roughly speaking it's in the same ballpark depending on if you're KJD or not and most would take the liquidity of all cash now

You're off the mark. Tech has no debt, no tuition, and pays more than in-house. We don't choose the legal career cause it pays more than tech, we choose it cause we can't succeed in tech. Which is why we end up in a pissing contest over preftige lmao.

Crazy. Tech = modern-day engineers. People choose not to work in tech for the same reason they chose not to become an engineer. They find the work boring and the people boring. (No knock on tech, lawyers are not everyone's cup of tea).

Pissing contests are human nature and are not all bad. At least they show people care about being the best. If your profession doesn't have pissing contests you are likely a) not in a profession, or b) in a dying profession.

Pissing contests in it of themselves aren't bad. But it's kinda nuts to justify a pissing contest over preftige, especially LW vs KE. Who cares? Most people wash out in a few years anyways.

The tech vs law debate is tired, and it's no surprise lawyers are going to fall for the sour grapes trope for most of the points regarding TC. But it's also telling when lawyers have to point to barrier of entry rather than skill or intelligence to argue their compensation is safer. If anything, the ALSP market is growing, calls for replacing or dismantling the bar outright are growing, and I'd wager most of the legal work (transactional and litigation) is under threat by advancements in tech. So no, I don't think the legal profession offers higher or safer lifetime compensation.

You must not actually work at a big firm and have seen how terrible the "tech" advancement to help work flow are. ALSP has no almost no impact on the types of clients v10's service

Same type of mindset that thought self-driving cars were impossible and that only 80 y/o scouters could recruit for baseball. The V10 side remark is just the cherry on top. I can't even tell if this is boomer mentality since firms got law students so wrapped up in this nonsense as well.

[Anonymous User]

https://www.teamblind.com/post/Google-i ... G-s4Q7HkVG
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Which-of ... s-No3fYtys
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Most-pre ... d-QQsSMtvT
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Most-pre ... d-BBu15TXU
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Which-is ... s-8Zhk43Ro
https://www.teamblind.com/post/Whats-th ... y-TvLdF2KP

I also saw one that was what's the most prestigious stakeholder yesterday.

Half that TC isn't liquid. This was hashed out a while back on here, but roughly speaking it's in the same ballpark depending on if you're KJD or not and most would take the liquidity of all cash now

You're off the mark. Tech has no debt, no tuition, and pays more than in-house. We don't choose the legal career cause it pays more than tech, we choose it cause we can't succeed in tech. Which is why we end up in a pissing contest over preftige lmao.

Crazy. Tech = modern-day engineers. People choose not to work in tech for the same reason they chose not to become an engineer. They find the work boring and the people boring. (No knock on tech, lawyers are not everyone's cup of tea).

Pissing contests are human nature and are not all bad. At least they show people care about being the best. If your profession doesn't have pissing contests you are likely a) not in a profession, or b) in a dying profession.

Pissing contests in it of themselves aren't bad. But it's kinda nuts to justify a pissing contest over preftige, especially LW vs KE. Who cares? Most people wash out in a few years anyways.

The tech vs law debate is tired, and it's no surprise lawyers are going to fall for the sour grapes trope for most of the points regarding TC. But it's also telling when lawyers have to point to barrier of entry rather than skill or intelligence to argue their compensation is safer. If anything, the ALSP market is growing, calls for replacing or dismantling the bar outright are growing, and I'd wager most of the legal work (transactional and litigation) is under threat by advancements in tech. So no, I don't think the legal profession offers higher or safer lifetime compensation.

You must not actually work at a big firm and have seen how terrible the "tech" advancement to help work flow are. ALSP has no almost no impact on the types of clients v10's service

Same type of mindset that thought self-driving cars were impossible and that only 80 y/o scouters could recruit for baseball. The V10 side remark is just the cherry on top. I can't even tell if this is boomer mentality since firms got law students so wrapped up in this nonsense as well.

Elite firms with excess revenue would likely be the first to innovate, if possible, given they could make even more money (by taking even more business away from lesser ranked firms). You clearly have no idea what you are talking about... have fun at you unranked v800

[Anonymous User]

Same type of mindset that thought self-driving cars were impossible and that only 80 y/o scouters could recruit for baseball. The V10 side remark is just the cherry on top. I can't even tell if this is boomer mentality since firms got law students so wrapped up in this nonsense as well.

what type of high margin work, specifically, do you think is replaceable by ALSPs. from my experience, if anything, tech is pushing billables up - Kira makes mass + more sophisticated diligence easier to do, etc

[Anonymous User]

Same type of mindset that thought self-driving cars were impossible and that only 80 y/o scouters could recruit for baseball. The V10 side remark is just the cherry on top. I can't even tell if this is boomer mentality since firms got law students so wrapped up in this nonsense as well.

what type of high margin work, specifically, do you think is replaceable by ALSPs. from my experience, if anything, tech is pushing billables up - Kira makes mass + more sophisticated diligence easier to do, etc

Take what happens now and then (quite literally) replace the lawyer with a computer. Do I think this AI capability will exist in the next decade? No. But 20-30 years? Who's to say. Sure psychologically maybe some big client feels more comfortable with human eyes and will pay a premium for some overworked associate to bleed their eyes out in doc review. But AI literally comes down to statistics applied to tonnes and tonnes of granular data + computing power. Find a way to store and run all of that data in a relatively quick manner and you have AI doing the work humans do at the same statistical error rate but at a lower overall error rate (machines don't get tired and make human errors). And at the end of the day, clients are going to go with whatever saves them the most money.

[Anonymous User]

Half that TC isn't liquid. This was hashed out a while back on here, but roughly speaking it's in the same ballpark depending on if you're KJD or not and most would take the liquidity of all cash now

You're off the mark. Tech has no debt, no tuition, and pays more than in-house. We don't choose the legal career cause it pays more than tech, we choose it cause we can't succeed in tech. Which is why we end up in a pissing contest over preftige lmao.

Crazy. Tech = modern-day engineers. People choose not to work in tech for the same reason they chose not to become an engineer. They find the work boring and the people boring. (No knock on tech, lawyers are not everyone's cup of tea).

Pissing contests are human nature and are not all bad. At least they show people care about being the best. If your profession doesn't have pissing contests you are likely a) not in a profession, or b) in a dying profession.

Pissing contests in it of themselves aren't bad. But it's kinda nuts to justify a pissing contest over preftige, especially LW vs KE. Who cares? Most people wash out in a few years anyways.

The tech vs law debate is tired, and it's no surprise lawyers are going to fall for the sour grapes trope for most of the points regarding TC. But it's also telling when lawyers have to point to barrier of entry rather than skill or intelligence to argue their compensation is safer. If anything, the ALSP market is growing, calls for replacing or dismantling the bar outright are growing, and I'd wager most of the legal work (transactional and litigation) is under threat by advancements in tech. So no, I don't think the legal profession offers higher or safer lifetime compensation.

You must not actually work at a big firm and have seen how terrible the "tech" advancement to help work flow are. ALSP has no almost no impact on the types of clients v10's service

Same type of mindset that thought self-driving cars were impossible and that only 80 y/o scouters could recruit for baseball. The V10 side remark is just the cherry on top. I can't even tell if this is boomer mentality since firms got law students so wrapped up in this nonsense as well.

Elite firms with excess revenue would likely be the first to innovate, if possible, given they could make even more money (by taking even more business away from lesser ranked firms). You clearly have no idea what you are talking about... have fun at you unranked v800

So... you mean what is literally happening at this moment? I doubt any V10 firm hasn't looked into AI and data analytics, and some have even created internal departments doing exactly just this.

Also, V800? Nice one.

[Anonymous User]

Same type of mindset that thought self-driving cars were impossible and that only 80 y/o scouters could recruit for baseball. The V10 side remark is just the cherry on top. I can't even tell if this is boomer mentality since firms got law students so wrapped up in this nonsense as well.

what type of high margin work, specifically, do you think is replaceable by ALSPs. from my experience, if anything, tech is pushing billables up - Kira makes mass + more sophisticated diligence easier to do, etc

Take what happens now and then (quite literally) replace the lawyer with a computer. Do I think this AI capability will exist in the next decade? No. But 20-30 years? Who's to say. Sure psychologically maybe some big client feels more comfortable with human eyes and will pay a premium for some overworked associate to bleed their eyes out in doc review. But AI literally comes down to statistics applied to tonnes and tonnes of granular data + computing power. Find a way to store and run all of that data in a relatively quick manner and you have AI doing the work humans do at the same statistical error rate but at a lower overall error rate (machines don't get tired and make human errors). And at the end of the day, clients are going to go with whatever saves them the most money.

I was looking for actual products that exist today that automate work done by high-margin firms, not like, a generic description of 'AI threat' based on a Vox explainer.

the 'threat' you just described - "an 'AI' I concede does not exist, 20 years from now, does work that a white collar professional does based on 'statistics' and 'data'" - is at such a high level of abstraction/generality that it could be written about any job in any industry.

[Anonymous User]

Same type of mindset that thought self-driving cars were impossible and that only 80 y/o scouters could recruit for baseball. The V10 side remark is just the cherry on top. I can't even tell if this is boomer mentality since firms got law students so wrapped up in this nonsense as well.

what type of high margin work, specifically, do you think is replaceable by ALSPs. from my experience, if anything, tech is pushing billables up - Kira makes mass + more sophisticated diligence easier to do, etc

Take what happens now and then (quite literally) replace the lawyer with a computer. Do I think this AI capability will exist in the next decade? No. But 20-30 years? Who's to say. Sure psychologically maybe some big client feels more comfortable with human eyes and will pay a premium for some overworked associate to bleed their eyes out in doc review. But AI literally comes down to statistics applied to tonnes and tonnes of granular data + computing power. Find a way to store and run all of that data in a relatively quick manner and you have AI doing the work humans do at the same statistical error rate but at a lower overall error rate (machines don't get tired and make human errors). And at the end of the day, clients are going to go with whatever saves them the most money.

I was looking for actual products that exist today that automate work done by high-margin firms, not like, a generic description of 'AI threat' based on a Vox explainer.

the 'threat' you just described - "an 'AI' I concede does not exist, 20 years from now, does work that a white collar professional does based on 'statistics' and 'data'" - is at such a high level of abstraction/generality that it could be written about any job in any industry.

The AI purge already happened. The tech that slaughtered tens of thousands of lawyer jobs was led by control - F, email, google, optical character recognition, Westlaw, Lexis, firm websites and publications, and electronic folders with search. Lawyer job growth stopped (despite population growth) around 2000 and then entry-level jobs dropped off a cliff from 2013 to 2017. They called this the lawyer bubble. But the AI transition was complete by 2018. Since then, tech efficiencies have been tapped out and law jobs have been growing with the population / economic demand.