Adam White reports that dumping his laptop in class has made him pay more attention to class discussion, in part because of his "unobstructed view."
I have to say that today was the first day I barely lifted my head. When I write notes, I have to look at the page. My writing turns into unintelligible soup if I don't. On the other hand, when I'm using my laptop (which wasn't one of those ridiculous huge monsters that blocked the light of day from my face), I'm able to pay attention to the discussion better and hear more, partially because I can turn my head and look at whomever is speaking. I don't look at my screen unless I'm formatting things because I don't need to. Moral of the story? If you don't have carpal tunnel problems and want to use a laptop in class a) get a tiny laptop and b) learn how to touch type.
p.s. To track the whole laptop debate from a few months ago (I think I have most of the links), start here!
Edward Tufte (Professor Emeritus at Yale) is the grand-daddy of using graphics to convey information correctly. It wasn't until yesterday that I realized he had his very own website!
This kind of stuff isn't something that's taught in law school, yet I'd imagine that any courtroom lawyer could use a good dose of it. Lawyers should know how to use graphics precisely, as well as present them effectively. Moreover, knowing the principles of information design allows lawyers to pick apart their adversary's graphics to show they deceive the audience. Even lawyers that don't present in court would be able to take advantage of skills like these (beauty contests, anyone?).
Lucky you, Tufte is teaching seminars this spring in a few cities. The cost is $320 (which includes his three major books) -- $160 for full-time students. The seminar will meet in Boston on March 10, 11, 12, and 13 (that's four separate dates).
Tufte also has Ask E.T. and a News page with updated information. The only thing that could improve this website is a blog!
Faithful readers might know I have a mini-obsession with Vannevar Bush. Matt Webb says Google are building the Memex! He argues that the Blogger/Google combo -- the integration of authority and layered information gathering -- realizes Bush's vision. Interesting.
I'm still waiting for the dark, cynical commentary on the merger. I'm sure there's a way to make money there, I just haven't quite figured out what it is yet.
And now for my entirely heretical opinion: I'd be delighted if everyone got so fed up with Blogger they decided to use Movable Type instead! Centralized control bad. Decentralized good.
Dahlia Lithwick's column on professor-student dating is good, but this sentence is the best part:
As for the whole sleeping-with-the-professor thing, well, where else will they find a good crop of child-brides? I know of one who got frustrated with the law students (divorced two of them), so he moved on to the undergraduate crowd for bride no. 3. Apparently, professors, that's where it's at!
If you just can't get enough of law school, there's help for people like you!* LLM-guide.com is a whole website devoted to listing all the LL.M. programs worldwide (via Lawsites). Jurist also has a page listing LL.M. programs in American schools, with the added bonus of sorting by topical area.
* I would also recommend a trip to a psychiatrist, just to be sure you're not crazy.
Starting out on one's own is an option that is increasingly ignored by new law school grads. Even if you're not thinking about doing it one day, I doubt it's a bad idea to figure out the nuts and bolts of the business of law. I couldn't provide a more comprehensive list than the one for those who want to go solo by Myshingle.com.
District Judge Stephen Orlofsky is resigning from his appointment after a whopping eight years on the bench. The spin is that he's ticked that he didn't get confirmed for his Court of Appeals nomination. I'd put my money on, well, the money. Judges and other agitators for a judicial salary increase have been saying for quite some time that the dismally low salaries of judges (relative to their counterparts in big firms) would eventually force some judges back to private practice. (How else is one to afford the extravagant lifestyle cultivated in pre-judicial years?)
Orlofsky says it's about "intellectual ventures." Apparently Blank Rome's PR people are working for him already!
[nb. I'm feeling kind of caustic today. Forgive me in advance.]
Update: Myshingle.com also has some thoughts.
When wondering how to pronounce the tongue-twister of a firm you're interviewing with the next day, don't sweat it. Just call the main line in the morning. A very nice secretary will answer with the name of the firm veryveryvery quickly. Note pronunciation. Apologize for wrong number. Go happily to interview knowing that everyone else will bungle it.
Give eternal rest to my laptop, O Lord. It served me well through many a trying time. That little laptop, ever my constant companion, was a refurb, yet she always seemed brand new. She toiled ceaselessly in pursuit of better outlines and higher Snood scores. She grew heavy as my classmates bought featherweight laptops, but her weight served as a comfort. I lament her loss; yet forgive me Lord, I take perverse pleasure in knowing she was password protected and the sick bastard who stole her cannot disturb her everlasting repose.
My laptop was stolen yesterday. I feel like vomiting. Repeatedly.
I've just realized (because I'm not in the habit of visiting my own site) that my posts for the last five days or so have vanished. I've no idea what happened. This is very sad. Fortunately I didn't write anything ground breaking.
I am now going to practice a severely affected British accent so I can say Crikey! in an authentic manner. Wish me luck.
You know, I think Larry Lessig fan fiction is just taking things way too far. I'll be okay with it, though, as long as people don't start writing slash. I just couldn't see a Lessig/Valenti hookup.
Mr. Poon sent along this very cute cartoon. Unfortunately, there's no Alice to set things right!
I made a pre-emptive strike on the snow last night, but, alas! It was not sufficient to reduce the amount of work I had to do today. My downstairs neighbor and I dug for two hours. My pinkie toe got somewhat frozen, but I think it's going to be okay. So, send some happy thoughts to my toe, and perhaps we'll get down to some blogging! (Yes, my toe & I really are a team. We each need to be at peak capacity in order for blogging to occur.)
Stanford Law is now allowing students in the Stanford Pre-Law Society to shadow law students and be a law student for the day. I'm pretty sure to get the full effect they should be required to do some asinine bluebooking assignment and then carry their mentor law student's books around for a day. They should actually prep by carrying small children around for a week and hunching over their computers so they have the full effect.
Also, to be real law students, they should try New England and trudging through a foot of snow.
Bitter? Me? Never! (Why am I not in Florida??)
My brief (yet wry) comment on Judge Jones and the Federalist Society has sparked an onslaught of text over at Sub Judice. Also quite an interesting discussion of blogs, flattery, and visitor stats. I won't sum up any further; go read!
Intrigued by a friend's recent description of depression rates among various populations* -- in order, married men (happily or not), single women, unhappily married women, happily married women -- I picked up a book that's been in my "in-box" for a bit. It's Wifework by Susan Maushart. It's a quick read and quite interesting. Maushart describes the inequality that exists between marrieds in terms of housework, childcare, etc. (i.e., "wifework"). Incredibly, married women seem not to actually notice exactly how much more work they do than their husbands.
An interesting anecdote: in a study of housework habits, they found several men who not only insisted that the household contained certain appliances (e.g., washing machines), they claimed they were the primary users of the putative machines.
I found it all terribly amusing.
* This is actually related to law school; the description was in a case book.
New laptop diversion: Yahoo Games Text Twist.
Very, Very Dangerous.
I regret to report that I indeed have not been away on a refreshing restorative. Indeed, Professor X has seduced me with legal wiles. X is so amazingly mind-numbingly brilliant it actually hurts, but likes to have toadies like me to bounce ideas off of. X is also (unfortunately for me, because I have to finish reading it all) a publishing machine. We're working on a new book and there is an overwhelming amount of work to be done -- X hasn't touched this particular branch in a few years.
The other night we spent several hours discussing bizarre and esoteric theories. Research assistants should avoid this at all costs. You learn little because you don't understand what they're talking about, yet are somehow called upon to finish working out the details.
Even now, X's siren-song calls. It says, "Alice! You do understand and feel an irresistible urge to write me a memo!" Hopefully I can get a little blogging done first.
I almost thought it was April 1 when I read this.
Fifth Circuit Judge Edith Jones recently spoke at a UVA Federalist Society event arguing that the Supreme Court has contributed to social decay in America. She argued, "Judges should not issue decisions that are fatal to society." Funny, the Federalist Society's statement of purpose explicitly says: "that it is emphatically the province and duty of the judiciary to say what the law is, not what it should be."
Formalism is all about ignoring societal consequences. Am I missing the point here?
Grades really do matter. Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher requires all hires, including lateral partners, to rank near the top of their class in law school. They recently turned down a lateral hire with $7 million in portable book because he didn't make the grade. Ouch.
I have been cited! Okay, not quite. But Judge A. Raymond Randolph did mention my namesake in his dissent for Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms Control v. United States Department of Commerce
Read the opinion if you'd like more context. I just like the cat!
"Wholly new forms of encyclopedias will appear, ready made with a mesh of
associative trails running through them, ready to be dropped into the
memex and there amplified. The lawyer has at his touch the associated
opinions and decisions of his whole experience, and of the experience of
friends and authorities. The patent attorney has on call the millions of
issued patents, with familiar trails to every point of his client's
interest." - Vannevar Bush, As We May Think
Bush was such a visionary it amazes me every time I reread this seminal piece. He also describes a mini-camera (to be worn on forehead) that could record anything "worthy of the record." Sorta reminds you of the teensy little phone cameras, doesn't it?
Law.com recently posted a little piece implying that lawyers' cynicism comes before law school, not after. Liable asked if there is "a relationship between an individual's motivations for attending law school and his or her success in it?"
Well, like any good lawyer, I would have to say it depends. I went into law school dreaming of oodles of cash. (Yes, I did! Really!) Well, the other half of it was that I didn't want to spend another 5-7 years in school getting my Ph.D. Through the magic of stipends, that would have been a far cheaper route than what I'm looking at now, but I think I needed the disillusionment that comes with a serious examination of one's motives and the reality of the workplace. I've learned through the years that stumbling a few times along the way makes you realize where you want to go, not just where you're headed.
For others, obviously, it's different. Ambivalent Imbroglio examines the "power" that comes with being a lawyer. Looking at it like that, it looks pretty neutral, but it can cut both ways; power can be used for both good and evil. (Yes, we're now in law student comic book superhero land, if you were wondering).
The question might be is it supposed to do something for us, or are we supposed to do something for others? Should we go in with the motivation that we're supposed to make a difference in the world? Or is it enough that we thought it was interesting?
I think how you answer that question helps a person define her success (and perhaps even partially answers the question of cynicism). But we needed be completely one-sided. Only the uber-cynic or the uber-optimist would say it was either/or. I think most of us need to feel that we're making a difference and feel personally fulfilled.
Whatever your motivation might be, it's best that you figure it out quickly in law school, lest you be lost in a corporate wasteland with few options. If what you think you want out of your career doesn't sound right to you, don't be afraid to radically reconceptualize your definition of happiness. I can say unequivocally that it's worth it.
They're going to have some real trouble getting women to use this security device. Really, what woman would consent to a machine storing information about the "unique shape and weight distribution of [her] rear end"?
