Isn't it tragic how "pay a lawyer to tell you what your rights are" seems to be the answer to everything?

Yes and no. My thinking is coloured by a few years in law school before dropping out.

If there is a true "five nines" in our lives, it's the reliability of the law. We each interact with and under the law dozens, hundreds, even thousands of times every day without ever needing recourse to lawyers.

But when you need a lawyer, you need a lawyer. One might as well sigh heavily about needing plumbers when the pipe bursts. Specialisation is normal and -- this is what I like most -- lawyers are more than a paid service. They have a fiduciary duty, they are ethically required to be dutiful advocates.

Personally, while I wish the world was simple and lawyers were cheap, I have never regretted spending the money to consult with them.

Isn't law school a few years?

4 years, full time or equivalent, for an LLB in Australia. I did one year full time, 3 years part time, before dropping out.

Not really. They're experts in law. We're experts in engineering. Doctors are experts in medicine. Would you say it's tragic that one needs to pay a doctor to tell you what's wrong with you?

But often when things come up and it's "Hire a lawyer" it feels like responding to "How do I change my password?" with "Hire a software engineer." The law is very user-unfriendly.

Also hearing that I should take the same remedy whether I have a question or I need to be defended against criminal prosecution seems strange and intimidating, like being told I should hire a brain surgeon for a migraine headache.

Yes. We need to politicaly organize to make legal protection for tech workers scalable.

Lawyers are as varying as doctors, and for the same reason.

It's irreducibly complex because it involves humans.

So lucky to live in a country where the average number of interactions with a lawyer in a human life, both personally and professionally, is between zero and one.