You do not need a STEM background to become a tech lawyer. But you do need to learn enough about tech to be able to competently represent your clients.
Here is an extremely short list of books I recommend for law students and lawyers who want to gain foundational tech knowledge:
1. "The Pattern On The Stone: The Simple Ideas That Make Computers Work" by W. Daniel Hillis
This book is a quick, accessible read. You'd be surprised how many tech lawyers do not know how computers actually work. Don't be one of them.
Also a very accessible book! The book first introduces the basics of computing and AI/ML in plain English, before explaining the realities and limits of AI through real-life examples. mitpress.mit.edu/books/artifici…
3. "Venture Deals: Be Smarter Than Your Lawyer and Venture Capitalist" by Brad Feld and Jason Mendelson
This is a useful book for lawyers who want to work with startups. It demystifies the venture financing process in terms that are accessible and useful. amazon.com/Venture-Deals-…
That's it. That's the list.
There are MANY more great books that are helpful for tech lawyers, including many that critique tech and tech law, and many that are subject-specific. (You know I have privacy recs!)
But I often recommend these 3 to folks looking to get started.
If anyone knows other books or resources that provide something similar—accessible, easy-to-read, and interesting introductions to tech concepts for people w/o STEM backgrounds—please chime in! I'd love to expand this list, especially with recs from more underrepresented voices!
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
There are thousands of journalists and subject matter experts who are ready and willing to talk about anti-Asian violence and the Asian-American experience. Do better.
I get that it’s hard to find sources on deadline, and often you end up with multiple outlets scrambling to book the same few voices. And sometimes you try your best, and you still end up with a #manel on gender. Plus, this is work that’s often unappreciated and uncompensated.
I'm seeing a lot of ambivalence about $GME from internet researchers and advocates. It's fun to watch a bunch of Redditors take on predatory hedge funds by manipulating stock prices. But these are the same tactics used for harassment campaigns, disinfo influence ops, etc.
Personally, I find it hilarious. In a battle between Big Finance vs. The Internet, I know who I'm rooting for, always. Money is imaginary, the stock market is a simulation, the system is a simulacrum, etc.
But I'm also mindful that @wphillips49 and others have repeatedly found that internet users "doing it for the lulz" and ironic trolling can often lead to terrible real-world harms. That's the crux of the uncertainty you'll see from many internet researchers when asked about $GME.
For "Intro to Data Privacy" this year, I wanted to show students a brief glimpse of the breadth of privacy perspectives in law. I offered a selection of readings and asked students to choose just one to read/skim and share insights with the class.
Some personal news: I have accepted a new position as content moderator for all my family and friends, as they send each other coronavirus misinformation and rumors.
Welcome new coworkers! Since this tweet is doing the numbers now, I'll thread a few links on how to spot misinformation and how to help people in your life get reliable news about COVID-19:
The SIFT method from @infodemicblog is simple and useful to share with others.
S I F T
-Stop.
-Investigate the source.
-Find better coverage.
-Trace claims, quotes, and media to the original context. infodemic.blog