> The notion that anything other than a state (read: leviathan) can administer justice is a dangerously misleading notion since unless both parties agree to abi

> The notion that anything other than a state (read: leviathan) can administer justice is a dangerously misleading notion since unless both parties agree to abide by the system then there is no consistent notion of justice (note that accepting your citizenship is tacit agreement). Well, how Hobbesian! Of course, this is not the only possible conception of justice, which is, as Plato put it (in Jowett's translation), "sometimes spoken of as the virtue of an individual, and sometimes as the virtue of a State." But in either case, if we want to get all philosophical about it, I share your skepticism... if justice is a virtue, can we really have a virtue as a service (VaaS)? Seriously, though, I don't think the OP's point is to propose administration of justice outside the state, but rather that certain tech advances can make it economically feasible for small, individual claims to be given a "fair shake" within the state system; claims which currently are too small to be worth a lawyer's---or even the claimant's---time without said tech.