Business

Toyota’s Boss Aims at Porsche’s Nurburgring Record

Published

7 years ago

August 20, 2019

Rob Leupen, who is the Toyota’s LMP1 Team’s boss, said that he is interested in Porsche’s Nurburgring Nordschleife record. He took a dig at Porsche when he said that he thinks the Toyota’s FIA world endurance Championship challenger is way quicker than Porsche’s 9191 Evo.

Porsche developed a faster version of the car in 2017. It made an upgrade to the Porsche 919 Hybrid. And it did so, to bid on Nordschleife track record. In the track, Porsche 919 Evo is a dream. It works its magic with its agile features.

It has more power, more downforce and reduced weight. Timo Bernhard made history when he clocked a time of 5 min 19.546 secs on the historic 20.832 km course. Leupen thinks his team can do better.

He says that his Toyota team, which is not far from Nurburgring in Cologne can do it better. And he vouches for the uprated TS050 Hybrid to do the job. He said, “I would like to try that, that would be fun! I think his car would be quicker on the Nordschleife than the Porsche.”

But even though he thinks that Toyota can do a better job, it is not on Toyota’s plans now. He reported that such a thing needs planning, time and money. It needs budget and strategy. But now Toyota has too much on its plate already.

Leupen’s hopes with Toyotas cars, is high. He also believes that the outgoing TS050 Hybrid that has been revised for its farewell season can outplay many.

He thinks that it can improve the lap record at Circuit de la Sarthe in its last Le Mans 24 hours appearance. Just before the slower hyper cars come to play.

Leupen said- “The new cars are a bit less complex, but we had to reduce costs. This year is the end of a beautiful era in which we witnessed the quickest and most efficient cars ever at Le Mans. That doesn’t just include our car but also Porsche and Audi.”

Hope this season has a great championship. Even with slower cars there is still much to experience.

Business

Click for Counsel: YesLawyer Wants to Make Lawyers as Accessible as Wi-Fi

Published

1 week ago

April 1, 2026

Matthew Wiles

Photo Courtesy of: YesLawyer

Byline: Andi Stark

For many people facing a legal problem, the most difficult part is not understanding their rights but finding a lawyer willing to speak with them in the first place. Long wait times, unclear pricing, and administrative hurdles often delay even the most basic consultations. YesLawyer, an AI-enabled plaintiff firm operating across all 50 states, is testing whether technology can shorten that gap.

Founded in 2024 by 25-year-old entrepreneur Rob Epstein, the platform offers free intake, automated screening, and, in many cases, same-day conversations with licensed attorneys. The idea is simple: reduce the friction between a client’s first request for help and an actual legal discussion. In this interview, Epstein explains how the system works, where artificial intelligence fits into the process, and what problems the company is trying to address in the broader legal system

Q: When you say you want lawyers to be “as accessible as Wi-Fi,” what does that mean in practical terms?

A: It’s a way of describing speed and availability. Someone dealing with a workplace dispute, a serious injury, or an immigration issue should be able to move from an online form or phone call to a real conversation with counsel in hours, not weeks. YesLawyer is structured so that a client begins with a free case evaluation, goes through automated conflict checks and basic screening, and, in many instances, speaks with a lawyer the same day.

Q: How does the process work once someone contacts the platform?

A: We use a structured workflow. It starts with a short questionnaire and an initial conversation to capture basic facts. That information feeds into conflict checks and internal review. The system then proposes a match with a licensed attorney and provides a calendar link for a virtual consultation, often within 24 hours. After the meeting, the client receives a written legal plan outlining next steps, deadlines, and estimated fees.

Q: Where does artificial intelligence fit into that process, and where does it stop?

A: AI is used for organizing and routing information, not for giving legal advice. It helps with conflict checks at scale, case categorization, and structured summaries so attorneys can focus on the substance of the matter. Every consultation is conducted by a licensed lawyer, and all decisions about strategy or next steps are made by humans.

Q: What problem is this model trying to solve in the current legal system?

A: Delay and cost are still major barriers. Many civil plaintiffs face long waits just to get a first appointment, along with high retainers and hourly billing that make early legal advice risky. We try to respond with faster consultations, flat-fee options, and financing. The idea is to remove administrative friction so lawyers spend less time on logistics and more time speaking with clients.

Q: Some critics say platforms like this blur the line between a technology company and a law firm. How do you describe YesLawyer?

A: We describe ourselves as a national, AI-enabled plaintiff firm that connects clients with independent attorneys. That structure does raise regulatory questions, especially around responsibility and oversight. We focus on licensing verification, attorney-written case plans, and clear communication about fees and services.

Q: You’ve said the main bottleneck is “systems” rather than people. What do you mean by that?

A: The issue isn’t that lawyers don’t want to help more people. It’s that the systems around them make it hard to scale their time. Intake, scheduling, and document handling take hours. Automating those parts means attorneys can handle more matters without being overwhelmed by repetitive tasks.

Q: Does this model risk favoring only the most profitable cases?

A: That’s a real concern in legal technology. Automation often works best for repeatable, high-volume disputes. Our view is that lowering administrative cost can actually make it easier to take on smaller or more complex cases that might otherwise be turned away. Whether that holds over time depends on the data.

Measuring Impact Over Time

YesLawyer’s attempt to compress the timeline between inquiry and consultation reflects broader changes in how legal services are being delivered. As artificial intelligence becomes more common in administrative work, firms are experimenting with new ways to reduce wait times and clarify costs.

The company’s early growth suggests that many clients value faster access to an initial conversation, even before considering long-term representation. Whether this platform-based model becomes widely adopted or remains one of several emerging approaches will depend on regulatory developments, lawyer participation, and measurable outcomes for clients. For now, YesLawyer’s experiment highlights a central question in modern legal practice: how quickly can help realistically be made available to the people who need it.