2 ms·

I appreciate this more thoughtful response, but bear in mind that it is the role of domain experts to (hopefully) clarify complicated matters for those on the o

I appreciate this more thoughtful response, but bear in mind that it is the role of domain experts to (hopefully) clarify complicated matters for those on the outside, whatever their demographic background. Age has positives and negatives associated with it, and ascribing only the latter to it with regard to judges and technology would mean we should set an upper age limit to all court proceedings dealing with any complicated subject - technology is hardly unique in that respect. There might be an argument for that (or at least some competency test beyond a certain advanced age), but not in the crass, prejudiced way implied in the OP.

ghaff 6y ago
>I appreciate this more thoughtful response, but bear in mind that it is the role of domain experts to (hopefully) clarify complicated matters for those on the outside, whatever their demographic background. I'm familiar with one particular subset of the SCO case. Suffice it to say that a great deal of legal and expert witness time (from both sides) went into creating detailed reports that were intended to be consumed by a non-specialist that laid out history, discussed various claims, and so forth. A judge could of course choose not to spend the time and effort to digest all this information--but that would be the case whether you're talking technology contract and IP claims or you're talking some complicated and arcane case of real estate contracts.