Listen on mobile platforms: 
Apple Podcasts | 
Overcast | 
Spotify
Information Inspirations
The Return of FREE PACER!!
Can Congress Regulate Algorithms used in judicial processes?
Listen, Subscribe, Comment
Transcript
[00:00:00] Greg Lambert: I don’t know. Are you Tupac or are you Biggie?
[00:00:03] Marlene Gebauer: Tupac.
[00:00:04] Greg Lambert: All right, I’ll be Biggie on this episode.
[00:00:16] Marlene Gebauer: Welcome to The Geek in Review, the podcast designed to cover the legal information profession with a slant toward technology and management. I’m Marlene Gebauer.
[00:00:25] Greg Lambert: And I’m Greg Lambert. So I think, Marlene, we have a record number of guests on the show today as we talk with four of the collaborators of the upcoming NYU Law and Tech Impact on Innovation Conference being held at the NYU Law School on October 15.
[00:00:43] Marlene Gebauer: Yeah, it’s going to be a great show. Our guests today are Felicity Conrad, who is an NYU grad and co- founder and CEO of Paladin, Michael Weinberg, the executive director of the Engelberg Center on Innovation Law and Policy at NYU. Christian Lang, head of strategy at Reynen Court, and Anna McGrane, who is also an NYU Law alum and is the co-founder and COO of PacerPro.
[00:01:09] Greg Lambert: So they discussed the effect that the NYU Law School has had on the thriving legal tech community in New York, and that the West Coast definitely doesn’t have a lock on innovation.
[00:01:20] Marlene Gebauer: The battle’s on, right?
[00:01:21] Greg Lambert: It is. All right, are you Tupac or are you Biggie?
[00:01:26] Marlene Gebauer: Tupac.
[00:01:27] Greg Lambert: All right, I’ll be Biggie on this episode. All right, but before we get into that, let’s hear this week’s Information Inspiration. All right, Marlene, mine is, and it’s been a while since we’ve said it, but my Information Inspiration this week brings back the call for Free Pacer. So Northwestern University’s interdisciplinary team, which includes seven law faculty, including one of our previous guests, Tom Gaylord, they were awarded a National Science Foundation Convergence Accelerator grant this month.
[00:02:07] Marlene Gebauer: Sweet. Very good.
[00:02:08] Greg Lambert: Well, it’s really sweet because this $1 million grant will be used to advance Northwestern’s AI-powered data platform, which interfaces with the federal PACER system. Powered data platform, which interfaces with the federal PACER system. So I reached out this week to Tom Gaylord and he was pretty excited about the award and hopes that they can actually turn this $1 million into $5 million with additional grants. So good luck to them.
[00:02:35] Marlene Gebauer: Exactly.
[00:02:36] Greg Lambert: So the Northwestern Open Access to Court Records Initiative, NOACRI, I think is how that acronym is.
[00:02:40] Marlene Gebauer: NOACRI for the acronym.
[00:02:47] Greg Lambert: So this team includes lawyers, journalists, economists, and policymakers across the different schools there at Northwestern. And they are working to create tools needed to make data locked in PACER available, and then link that data to public information about the litigants, the judges, lawyers, and the courts. It’s a good thing they’re not in France.
[00:03:10] Marlene Gebauer: That’s right.
[00:03:11] Greg Lambert: So I have high hopes for Tom and the rest of the NOACRI members so that they can put this money to good use and help us get one step closer, not only to free PACER, but a better and more open access to the court docket system.
[00:03:25] Marlene Gebauer: So Greg, do you think Congress can regulate algorithms used in the judicial process?
[00:03:30] Greg Lambert: No.
[00:03:33] Marlene Gebauer: Well, California Representative Mark Tanako says yes. He’s introduced the Justice and Forensic Algorithms Act of 2019. This JIFA, is it JIFA or GIFA?
[00:03:46] Greg Lambert: I think it’s GIFA.
[00:03:47] Marlene Gebauer: Okay, GIFA. Act sets to create federal standards around algorithms used in the judicial process and prohibit defense teams from seeing how algorithms are used and evaluating the evidence by hiding behind trade secret protections. Now, as we’ve discussed before with Drexel Professor Hannah Block Wiebe, issues surrounding bias and actual processes in these mostly black box algorithms can have substantial implications on how courts determine things ranging from bail to sentencing length. According to the Electronic Privacy Information Center, or EPIC, The computational forensic algorithm standards of this bill would include considerations of bias, accuracy, precision, and reproducibility, and make publicly available documentation by developers of computational forensic software of the purpose and function of the software, the development process, including source and description of training data, and internal testing methodology and results, including source and description of testing data. So we’ll see how this all shakes out.
[00:04:58] Greg Lambert: Yeah, I’m not very confident in what the federal government can do as far as doing this, but they are creating standards, so maybe that will work. I had one quick thing that I wanted to add for the listeners who may not know this. Marlene and I are actually in the Houston studio.
[00:05:19] Marlene Gebauer: Recording studio, AKA your office.
[00:05:19] Greg Lambert: AKA my office tonight. It’s been a little bit of Twitter traffic tonight where Nicholas Shaver, who had tweeted earlier about the fact that she was going through a large group of her fall associates there at her firm, and that only one of them had really any significant training in technology while they were in law school.
[00:05:40] Marlene Gebauer: That’s terrible.
[00:05:43] Greg Lambert: So a law student had reached back out to her to say, look, it’s really hard for us that are techies to figure out a way to express that when we’re doing our clerkships or we’re working as summer associates. So my response was that we’re putting, I think, too much of the onus on the law schools to try and figure this out because they’re creating programs, but we’re not exactly giving them a great path, nor are we encouraging the students to get on that path. So my suggestion is, while we have the 1L and 2Ls in the summer associate program, that we tell them that if their knowledge of technology is really important, their knowledge of technology is really important, that they go back to school and they take those classes and they learn it, and that they should come back stronger when they’re ready to actually practice as fall associates.
[00:06:36] Marlene Gebauer: You know, it’s funny. We hear so much about these different, you know, tech labs and tech training in various law schools, and we’ve interviewed people who run these things multiple times on the podcast, and yet you’re still getting people who haven’t taken any of these classes. And, you know, in addition to what you’re saying, maybe we apply some design thinking and figure out, okay, you know, what are the things that firms want them to know, and then communicate that to the schools and to the students so that they know these are the things that we’re expecting of you.
[00:07:23] Greg Lambert: This sounds like a great program for Cat Moon to take.
[00:07:26] Marlene Gebauer: Exactly.
[00:07:27] Greg Lambert: All right, Cat, you’ve been given your assignment.
[00:07:30] Marlene Gebauer: Tweet away. And that wraps up this week’s Information Inspirations.
[00:07:39] Greg Lambert: Marlene, we had a really good conversation with four of the people that are involved in NYU Law and Tech’s Impact on Innovation Conference, which is being held at NYU Law School next month on October 15th. Anne McGrain from PACER Pro had reached out to me a couple of weeks ago and had given me a heads up on this, and she thought it would be really interesting for us to talk with the folks involved. And she is actually really excited because she thinks there’s a lot of opportunity here to get feedback and perspectives from the legal information profession as well for this conference.
[00:08:16] Marlene Gebauer: Yeah, and I think it’s really nice we have an opportunity to sort of highlight some alternative types of conferencing opportunities for folks. We’re joined by a few guests this week, all of whom are involved with the upcoming NYU Law and Tech Impact on Innovation Conference at NYU Law on October 15th. We have Felicity Conrad, who’s an NYU grad and co-founder and CEO of Paladin. Michael Weinberg is the Executive Director at Engelberg Center on Innovation Law and Policy at NYU. Christian Lange is the head of strategy at Rayencourt. And Anna McGrain is also an NYU Law alum and is the co-founder and COO at PACER Pro. Thank you all for taking the time to talk with us today.
[00:09:05] Greg Lambert: So Anna, you and I have been talking a lot lately about this NYU Law and Tech conference. Would you tell us all how this conference got started and why you are drawing on the NYU community as a base for the conference?
[00:09:20] Anna McGrane: Yeah, so you know, I think it’s had a pretty organic start. And it’s mostly a result of just the sheer number of NYU Law alumni who are involved in this space. So both on the law firm management side, in-house, there’s now the NYU Law Venture Fund. There’s several attorneys I know who have left big law practice to become full-time coders. And then, of course, an entire suite of people who have either founded or taken on leadership positions at some of the leading legal technology companies. So everything from Cura Systems to Reply All to, of course, Rayencourt and Paladin. And I think, as far as the NYU community and why this might be a good place for this type of conference, for me, it’s really many of the same reasons that I chose to go to NYU Law over some of the other schools that were similarly ranked. this might be a good place for this type of conference, for me, it’s really many of the same reasons that I chose to go to NYU Law over some of the other schools that were similarly ranked. In part, it had a really diverse background. So most people had taken a couple of years off to work and maybe it was in science or maybe it was in finance, but they weren’t just going straight through. They were doing different things. I also really liked that the school was right in New York. because we talk about the practice of law. You don’t want an entirely academic experience. You really want to be in the thick of things. And I also really did like that it was, that if the school had gone from being something like a top 40 school to a top five, because to me that felt like it was going to be a very dynamic and collegial place where people would be willing to try new things. And I think those qualities are things that are really necessary as an industry, we try and rethink the legal service delivery model. Because if we’re going to get this right, we really need a mix not just of legal minds, but professionals with diverse skills, project management, finance, technology, information architecture, and people who are working together as equal partners, not the traditional pyramid. And those conversations need to be happening in an environment where it’s okay to rethink existing paradigms. And I think that’s one of the things that NYU can really offer.
[00:11:18] Greg Lambert: So there’s something in the water in that part of New York.
[00:11:21] Anna McGrane: I don’t know, you laugh, but location, location, location. It’s a really fun neighborhood that you get people who are looking for balance and quality of life, and then they go off into Big Law and they realize that it could have much better quality of life if some of the tools worked better, or if communication systems were better, or when you started out as a 1L, you got some sort of process map instead of a go back to your computer and figure this out.
[00:11:31] Marlene Gebauer: into big law and they realize they could have much better quality of life if some of the tools worked better, or if communication systems were better, or when you started out as a 1L, you got some sort of process map instead of a go back to your computer and figure this out. Christian, is this the same for you? And can you tell us a little about the New York the legal tech community that you founded? And how is this group similar to or different from the NYU law and tech community?
[00:12:00] Christian Lang: Yeah, absolutely. No, there’s a great resonance between the two communities. I mean, when Anna and I were trying to help kind of get this ball rolling and engage all these other amazing stakeholders, I mean, she mapped out in a really great way why there’s all these kind of existing resources in place, but there’s also this huge opportunity. And there’s also just a huge need for support. I mean, this legal technology vertical and just legal innovation more broadly is something we all care a tremendous amount about. But trying to get involved in it and up to speed in it and make a difference is incredibly painful. And Anna and I have had long conversations about lessons we’ve learned that we feel like it was valuable to go through the process, but somebody should have been able to tell you that. And there’s a lot of great expertise and experience to leverage. And we just have a really kind of wonderful community, I think, to draw upon with a lot of interesting stakeholders. And I actually think, I personally believe that innovation-related conversations, if you truly want to do something transformative, you need to be able to bring a bunch of different people together, looking at kind of common questions through different lenses and different experiences. together looking at kind of common questions through different lenses and different experiences. And so, we thought, you know, NYU is a fantastic community for that. And as a segue, I mean, that’s very resonant with the mission of the Legal Tech Meetup. So, you know, I run, it’s called the New York Legal Tech Meetup. It’s a group that started about two years ago. And it was really born out of a fact that I was kind of a newbie at that time into the legal innovation space and was having a blast getting up to speed. and meeting all these great people and experiencing this wonderful community and going to these conferences and things. But when you walked away from the conferences, this wonderful community that you felt like you had access just kind of dissipated a bit. And then I looked around and saw all of these opportunities for collaboration and support and was like, well, we just need more infrastructure, particularly here in New York, which I’m very bullish should be kind of the center of the legal technology universe to like share information and support one another. So, you know, we threw it up a listing on meetup.com in a very like, let’s just kind of get together and collaborate and support kind of way. And in a way, critically, I think that’s completely free from your typical pay-to-play dynamics of kind of conference and innovation related conversations. And it just kind of struck a chord with people because there were a few hundred folks who signed up immediately. And we were just, I think today crossing the 1500 number mark, which is super exciting. And we, that’s a lot.
[00:14:18] Marlene Gebauer: That’s great.
[00:14:22] Christian Lang: Yeah, we have just people from all different, you know, we’ve got practitioners. We have legal tech startup founders, but people from all over the ecosystem, we deliberately try to activate different constituencies and bring them to the table and try to add value and do everything from demos to panel discussions and things along those lines. but people from all over the ecosystem, we deliberately try to activate different constituencies and bring them to the table and try to add value and do everything from demos to panel discussions and things along those lines. And for me, it is exactly that same idea that we’re trying to, we’ve got a lot of great resources, a lot of cool people, the same thing we’re trying to do at NYU. Let’s bring them together and have meaningful conversations where people are looking at common questions through different lenses and see what we can do.
[00:14:50] Marlene Gebauer: Yeah, I’ve actually been to a couple of those meetups, and I thought they were really great because it did bring a bunch of very different people together. I mean, I met a bunch of people that I had never met before, and you go to the conferences and you start to get to know the people, you have the same faces there. And so this was very refreshing. It was very relaxed. And as you pointed out, so it wasn’t a pay to play thing. You could just come there and share ideas very freely.
[00:15:15] Christian Lang: And that’s actually, I just want to underline that because that’s been critical, I think, to the success of the NYU community we’re trying to get going as well. It’s wonderful partners like the school and like the Engelberg Center and people who are willing to provide resources and provide support without asking for, you know, marketing help or whatever the case may be, right? And so in the meetup, we rely on law firms to give us space and food and drink, but otherwise we kind of run it in a very non-profit mindset. And we have the conversations we think are most important and no one can buy their way in. And I think that really moves the needle. People feel like they’re not being taken advantage of and then they are very willing to jump on and support.
[00:15:50] Greg Lambert: So you don’t have to be in Silicon Valley to talk legal tech?
[00:15:54] Christian Lang: No, we’ve got a wonderful, burgeoning and even booming community here in New York that we’re really excited about.
[00:16:00] Greg Lambert: While NYU is the touchstone for this particular conference, you guys are all reaching out beyond the archways of the NYU building. And Anna, who else are you wanting to attract to these types of sessions? Anna? Anna, just a second. Can you start over? You were still muted.
[00:16:18] Anna McGrane: Oh, sorry. Well, we’re not reaching out to anybody. We were thinking a big silence would be the most appropriate way to go into this. So I was going to start with library. Because I do think, as you’re getting more technology services that are being more deeply integrated into legal practice, you have to have information professionals who are trained to understand data sets and algorithms. and compare software. Beyond that, we’ve reached out to the CIO community, the CKO community, IT practice managers, project managers, and then the venture folk. Because what you ultimately want is a conversation between law firms, their clients, which is still going to be a bunch of lawyers, the business people, the people who are creating the technology, and the people who are funding it. So you can think about not only the types of technology that are being built, which of course also the academic community provides that broader normative and institutional vision, but how they’re being built, why they’re being built, how they’re being sold, and what we can do better.
[00:17:19] Marlene Gebauer: So, I want to switch gears for just a sec. We have one of the speakers here with us. So, Felicity is going to be one of the speakers. And before we jump into your session topics, what is it that drew you to this style of conference? And what do you think sets it apart?
[00:17:36] Felicity Conrad: Well, first of all, thank you so much for having me. It’s exciting to be able to share a little bit about this. And for me, I certainly have a soft spot in my heart for NYU as my alma mater. So, I mean, for me, I think it starts there. I co-founded a company called Paladin, and we’re a pro bono tech company. We build software to support pro bono legal services. And for me, when I think about NYU, even beyond kind of this particular conference, I think about a private university working in the public service. It’s really great for me to be able to thread kind of that private sector public service needle through our work and to bring that back to kind of where I first studied law. And then second, to be able to build upon that public service element with the innovation piece. So, that’s something that I think this kind of alumni community is bringing back to the law school and starting to kind of incubate within the law school, hopefully for current students, but also to create a community for all of the folks who started legal tech companies or interested in innovation, who, to Christian’s point, didn’t really have a home. And to kind of bring us back and say, hey, there is a community around this. We can have conversations. And not just conversations around companies or whatever, but also academic conversations and questions about how to think about parameters and morality and all of these sorts of fun things, at least to me. about parameters and morality and all of these sorts of fun things, at least to me. So, that’s kind of what I’m interested in.
[00:19:09] Greg Lambert: So the topic is impact on innovation at the conference. But, Felicity, what specifically are you going to be talking about?
[00:19:19] Felicity Conrad: So I’m hoping to cover a couple things. The first is a little bit of the substance of at least my work, which is the importance of building technology to serve the access to justice gap and what the benefits are there, both from a public service perspective as well as a business perspective. For background, we work with leading law firms, Fortune 500 companies, a little bit law schools and legal service organizations. And they use our software to manage their pro bono program and hopefully serve more pro bono clients, reduce the cost of running their pro bono programs, increase engagement, all that good stuff that innovation and technology can provide. So a little bit how justice is being deployed in access to justice right now, but then also related to the process. How does one go about building a software that’s used by major law firms and major corporate in-house legal teams? For us, we have engaged in co-development pretty religiously, so we work very closely with potential clients within in-house and firm legal departments to brainstorm, process map, prototype, do feedback sessions. So I think we’ll touch on a little bit that method and kind of how that’s led to successful product development.
[00:20:45] Marlene Gebauer: So Michael, I know you’re not speaking, but I know you have an in- depth knowledge of what’s going to be covered by the folks from NYU. So can you tell us a little bit about that?
[00:20:56] Michael Weinberg: Yeah, absolutely. And we’re really excited to be able to participate in this event because one of the big roles of the Engelberg Center is to provide that home for especially students and then the larger NYU community that’s interested in technology and interested in innovation. And that may be by going into a large law firm and practicing there, but it also very much is about law students who graduate and then go on to found companies and work directly in these companies. So one of the people from NYU who’s currently at NYU, not just an alum who will be speaking, is from NYU who’s currently at NYU, not just an alum who will be speaking, is Professor Jason Schultz, and he’s also a co-director of the Engelberg Center here. And Professor Schultz does a lot of work in sort of two areas that are really relevant to this event. The first is thinking about ways to prepare students who want to have non-traditional careers, legal careers in tech. And what you need to do as a law student to prepare yourself to have the kinds of opportunities that are personified by the people who are going to be participating in this conference. And then the other thing that he spends a lot of time working on is as these systems become more important and become more complex, making sure how we understand how they are being used and how they’re being used ethically in a non- discriminatory way, and in a way that really advances the intended goals of the technology. And so, you know, when you’re outside of the company, when you’re maybe a user of the technology, sometimes it feels like you put some information in and a black box does something and then you get something back. And the ways that people who are users of that information or who are affected by the decisions that that technology pushes people towards can make sure that that technology is returning results that are intended by everyone involved. So I know that he’s going to focus on those things. And then we also have students, current students, who have co- founded a new organization here at NYU Law about rights over tech. And it’s really a new student engagement group of students who want to do more engaged and critical thinking about the role of technology. And that includes the largest platforms and all those conversations that are going on. also needs to focus on the technology that we use every day in practice as part of our job.
[00:23:30] Greg Lambert: Now, you said rights over tech. That caught my attention. Can you explain what that is?
[00:23:35] Michael Weinberg: Yeah, it’s a new student group. And it’s funny, it almost feels like a generational change on how students think about, especially law students, think about technology. I think if you went back to when I was in law school, the student technology groups were, and I was part of this, so I can say this, were very, very bullish on technology and really interested in thinking about how to make use of all the upsides that technology will bring. And I think this new group has that optimism about the capability of technology, but also having lived through the last couple of years of technology, recognize that it’s important to bring a more nuanced and potentially more critical approach to that. And so, this is a group that’s really focused on having a holistic approach to discussions about the role of technology and the role that lawyers should have when engaging with technology. And so, we’re really excited the group is here. We’re really excited that the group is participating because it’s a perspective that is healthy to have at an event like this that is so focused on the technology that we’re all using to practice and work more efficiently.
[00:24:48] Greg Lambert: This is a prime example of something that Marlene and I have talked a lot about lately on the show, and that is the Generation Z that are now entering law school. And that dovetails perfectly with some of the values that this new generation has. It’s not just the upside, but they’re looking more holistically at how the technology affects them.
[00:25:14] Michael Weinberg: I think it’s great to see a really good example of something that we’ve been talking about. Here on the show.
[00:25:21] Marlene Gebauer: Yeah, it sounds like they’re grappling with the ethics of technology as well as the application of the technology.
[00:25:30] Michael Weinberg: So, are you starting to see students coming in with that mindset that they want to learn these two aspects but to apply it in a way other than practicing? I think so. Although, I think, truth be told, there have always been students who’ve come into law school and, at the beginning of their law school experience, didn’t think that going into a law firm or a large law firm was what they wanted to do. But so often, for a variety of reasons, they found themselves either pushed in that direction or that was the direction that was easiest to understand as a student. And so, one of the things that we’re trying to do is to set up a path and a guide that says, this may or may not be right for you, but if you’re curious about it, we’re going to explain what it means to do an alternative career path. We’re going to bring in people who want to mentor you and want to talk to you through the process so you can evaluate it. And then, if you decide it’s what you want to do, you have an opportunity to pursue that in a way that feels as supported as you would be as if you decided you wanted to go and start at a big law firm. So, we have fellows here at the center who are here explicitly to mentor. We have Sarah Feingold who, at one point, she was the, I think, 17th employee at Etsy and their first general counsel for about 10 years. And Sarah has come back and she’s done a number of other things in tech, and she’s a fellow, and her primary focus as part of her fellowship is to be a sounding board for students who think it would be fun. to be a sounding board for students who think it would be fun, it would be interesting to think about what it would mean to go in-house at a tech startup. I, myself, was a general counsel for a tech company for four years before I started here. And so, we want to make sure that students understand what that means and what they should be doing in law school now or years after they graduate to position themselves for those opportunities.
[00:27:37] Marlene Gebauer: Anna, you mentioned earlier that you want to engage with the law library community with this conference. What would you say this conference has to offer law librarians? And also, what do law librarians have to offer for others attending the conference?
[00:27:57] Anna McGrane: So, I suppose to start with the sales pitch for why you should come. Once a vendor, always a vendor. You know, there really is a goal, and bearing in mind that we’re just in the initial stages. So, for example, this year, we’ve got the chief product officer of Cura, who’s obviously actively engaged in some of the benefits of AI, who’s paired with Jason Schultz, who, as Michael has pointed out, has done a lot of work about some of the problems with AI and some of the dangers that we might face. And then, they’re going to be taking questions from these students from the Rights Over Tech group, who don’t only bring a perspective of, you know, what is the holistic implication or what are the holistic implications of legal technology. They also have PhDs in computer science and engineering and significant work experience. So, they’re able to ask what, for them, are very basic questions about how these technologies are being built and what we could potentially do with them to really improve our legal service delivery in a way that I think most of us are just not able to. do with them to really, you know, improve our legal service delivery in a way that I think most of us are just not able to. I don’t have the background to start to have that kind of conversation. The other part of it, of course, is that two-thirds of the folk that are attending are either NYU Law students or alumni. And I think one of the challenges that we have at a lot of these innovation conferences is that you get the folk who have started to think about innovation in a room. We all kind of agree that something needs to happen. And then one of the key stakeholders, the people who are practicing, are not at the table and they’re not engaged. So this is an opportunity for all of us to be together and to think proactively about what the future should look in what is a very neutral academic environment. As far as what we’re looking for, as I mentioned earlier, this is a conversation about technology. And one of the really privileged positions that a law librarian in big law or at a boutique or in-house has is that y’all have seen technology for the last 30 years develop. You spent a tremendous amount of time comparing technology softwares, looking at the algorithms, asking questions of vendors, seeing how everything’s been built. You’ve got education and information science and information architecture. And I think for us to really have a substantive conversation, we absolutely have to have that voice at the table and right from the beginning to make sure that we’re going on the right direction.
[00:30:27] Greg Lambert: Well, I can tell you, if you need someone to test some tech out that can break it, I’ve got somebody upstairs in my office that can help you out on that. So she’s really good at that.
[00:30:38] Anna McGrane: October 15th, 639. Come on.
[00:30:42] Greg Lambert: Well, I want to thank everyone, Felicity, Michael, Christian, and Anna. Thank you all for taking the time to talk with us today. It’s been a pleasure.
[00:30:51] Marlene Gebauer: Yeah, thank you.
[00:30:51] Anna McGrane: Yeah, thank you so much. Thank you. Thanks, everyone.
[00:31:05] Greg Lambert: All right, Marlene. Well, that’s a wrap for this episode. We’d like to thank all of our guests here. So let me go back through and name them again. We had Felicity Conrad, Michael Weinberg, Christian Lane, and Anna McGrain. So thank you all for taking the time to talk to us. That was fun. And I was glad that the software didn’t break with having so many people on.
[00:31:27] Marlene Gebauer: We were a little worried there for a minute, but it turned out okay.
[00:31:32] Greg Lambert: Yeah, sure did. Thanks again, guys.
[00:31:34] Marlene Gebauer: Listeners, please take the time to subscribe on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you listen to podcasts. Rate and review The Geek and Review as well. If you have comments about today’s show or suggestions for a future show, you can reach us on Twitter at @GabeBauerM or @Glambert, or you can call the Geek and Review hotline at 713-487-7270. or email us at geekandreviewpodcast at gmail.com. And, as always, the music you hear is from Jerry David Disica. Thank you, Jerry.
[00:32:05] Greg Lambert: Thanks, Jerry. All right, Marlene. We’ll talk to you later.
[00:32:08] Marlene Gebauer: All right, ciao for now. Hey, don’t take me away. I can walk on by the North Star, but I fail to notice that it’s still daylight, and the devil’s back on the bar, and the devil’s back on the bar, and the devil’s back on the bar.