Great Minds Think Alike

Over at Instapundit, Prof. Reynolds (whose class I unexpectedly got to sit in on while considering University of Tennessee for law school) links to Wired post regarding the poor schmuck who got fined for using a coffee shop's WiFi connection without buying anything. They want to know if anyone has an analogy for what this might be like.

Oddly enough, I posed a very similar question to my lawyer dad a week or so ago. Was it stealing? His WiFi has intruded into your...airwaves, I guess. Might it be like picking an apple from a neighbor's tree branch which has grown over your fence? Using his connection might cause him a slight loss in speed but would it truly be more than negligible (assuming you weren't doing a lot of streaming)? Isn't this a similar situation to having a radio or TV antenna? Courts have ruled that you don't have the right to record anything you want off your radio or TV; does this mean that you can't download anything if it's not from your own connection or one to which you have rights? It could be argued that you're stealing bandwidth from the service provider, I suppose, even if not your neighbor. If so, wouldn't the fault lie with the neighbor for not securing his connection?

What would happen if his signal interfered with yours? I'm sure, like with garage door openers, these signals don't share the exact same frequency but what if they did? Could you legitimately use some kind of a jammer?

Do people have right-of-way to your airspace? For building purposes they don't and there have even been cases of churches selling their aerial-development rights to neighboring buildings to allow those buildings to be built higher than normally allowable. If you had a low-level cell phone jammer that had a range that didn't extend outside of your apartment but blocked the signal to your downstairs neighbor would he be wronged?

I think the next three years are going to be very enjoyable but will also make my head hurt a lot.

Ave Maria Law School's Self-Immolation

Honestly, this blog isn't going to be All-Catholic, All The Time. Really.

As I've read at Volokh and Mark Shea, among other places, Ave Maria Law School is in some serious self-caused trouble. Many of the professors feel as though the school is being run as the personal fiefdom of a wealthy donor and board member, while the administration argues that the school is a "failed experiment" and starting over is best. Before I go any further, let me give some background.

Ave Maria Law School, which has no direct connection to Ave Maria University in Ave Maria Township in the state of Ave Maria Florida, is an independent conservative Roman Catholic law school in Ann Arbor, Michigan. Ann Arbor is also home to the elite law school at University of Michigan, as well as being the hometown of Tom Monaghan, founder of Domino's Pizza, who is the wealthy donor mentioned in the above paragraph. Monaghan is also the a major donor and founder (I believe) of Ave Maria University and Ave Maria Township (perhaps they could secede and call their new political entity the State of Grace?). The law school, as well as the university and the town, was formed because other Roman Catholic law schools, such as those at Notre Dame, Georgetown, and so on, were considered too liberal, both politically and theologically. Although US News & Work Report ranks AMLS at the bottom, in Tier 4, the school has received some positive attention and praise, and appeared to be slowly gaining in credibility and prestige.

From my perspective, it looks as though Monaghan and the administration want to connect the law school with the university, which would likely improve both of them. However, there's more to it than that. It's doubtful that the school would keep its extremely-important American Bar Association accreditation if they moved from Michigan to Florida, as Ave Maria Township is considered the middle of nowhere (not that it stops Washington & Lee from being a top-30 law school...). Fuel was added to the fire when the administration warned faculty not to use their AMLS email accounts to send emails criticizing the administration or promoting another law school. This was apparently done because some professors had sent email to the student body saying that they were investigating carrying on the mission of AMLS in Ann Arbor if the school relocated to Florida. The administration has said that they're dead-set on moving, and that there's no "Plan B" if they don't get ABA accreditation.

Obviously, I don't know exactly what the experiment of Ave Maria Law School entailed. Monaghan had apparently bought out two other Roman Catholic law schools in the area and closed them down, along with the short-lived Ave Maria College in Michigan he had founded. At this point, the move looks like a foolish decision being made by those with the authority to do so. I suspect that few of the professors will move to the new location, and I doubt that the ABA will certify the school, which is truly a death knell as AMLS graduates won't be able to sit for the bar exam in most states. At the same time, though, even having the exact same staff in the exact same buildings would be a different school if the legal recognition of the school were transferred down to Florida. To argue otherwise would be for Roman Catholic to admit that the Church of England is the legitimate expression of the Catholic faith in Britain, as they kept the property and all but one of the bishops kept their seats.

It seems to me that a wiser course of action would have been to start a satellite campus in Florida. If it was economically viable then the two campuses would strengthen each other and provide more opportunities, and if not viable than resources could quietly be shifted to one of the schools. Not being in the know, however, I have no idea if this would have been possible. In the meantime, though, just about everyone comes out poorly, with the faculty and administration looking petty and the students looking abandoned. I have a soft spot for the Catholics, and I hope God will continue the mission of the school somewhere, regardless of mankind's pettiness.

Computer Shopping

I'm realizing that I'll need some new things for law school. My cell phone plan ends soon and so I need to consider plans. I had Verizon while at Tech because it was the only carrier to get decent service, but Williamsburg is likely to be much better covered. My parents and one of my sisters have been using Cingular and they seem to really like that, in addition to having racked up more rollover minutes than they could possibly hope to use (I think I figured that it would take them talking nonstop for over five weeks (not counting nights and weekends) to get through them all. I'm also not sure what to do for a phone. I have the Audiovox CDM-8940 which has been okay but not stellar (the power jack on the phone is getting finicky, but the sound from the phone has always been excellent), and I'm wondering if I should get another basic phone, one of the ones with the fold-out QWERTY keyboard, or something like a Palm Treo. I don't want overkill, but it would be great to be able to browse the internet from whererever I am.

Anyway, this is supposed to be about computers, not cell phones. Due to a variety of issues, starting with human rights but also including quality, I'm unwilling to buy a computer made in China (and yes, I know that components of all computers are probably made there...you do what you can). That leaves me with Fujitsu (Japan), Dell (USA), and Acer (Taiwan)(possibly Asus, too, but I don't know anything about them). I'm also looking for a small, portable computer. The Toshiba A75-S229 is nice when it runs, although it often doesn't, and at 8lbs is a little heavy for a daily commute. Toshiba's tech support has also been abysmal, as has Best Buy's. At this point I've narrowed it down to two computers. They're both subcompact notebooks with 12.1" screens. I'd hook each of them up to a dock with a monitor and full-sized keyboard (and perhaps external hard drive) at home, so physical size isn't so important (I may implement this bit-by-bit as, and if, needed). Both are somewhat pricey, but I think you get what you pay for. I want something that will last me through the three years of law school and having to buy a replacement after two years would negate the price difference and would add a lot of hassle. Both computers have metal cases and are reputed to be relatively durable.

The first option is the Fujitsu Lifebook Q2010. It's really, really sleek-looking and at 2.2lbs sounds amazingly light. On the other hand, it's really, really expensive and has only so-so RAM. If the RAM can be upgraded then things are looking a lot better. One of the things I like most about it is that it's made in Japan. Obviously things have changed from the times of my parents and grandparents when "Made in Japan" is an august sign of quality. The "2010" in the name also seems somewhat auspicious, although not several-hundred-dollars-extra-auspicious if everything else is comparable.

The second option is the Dell XPS M1210. It's a bit heavier at 4.5lbs and requires some customizing before it's really comparable with the Q2010, but even with that it's several hundred dollars cheaper. "Made in USA" can be a mixed endorsement, and Dell's tech support has been called "Dell Hell" before. It does, however, have an integrated optical drive, even if it's about twice as thick as the Fujitsu.

I think it pretty much boils down to this: do I want something sleek and probably dependable yet expensive, or take a gamble on something that's probably fine, but is heavier and if it's not fine will be a major pain? What would a lawyer do?

Computers or Paper in the Classroom?

There've been a lot of posts on legal blogs about the use (and banning) of laptop computers in the classroom for law school. This recent blogstorm started with this Washington Post article by Georgetown Law professor David Cole, and I heard about it through The Volokh Conspiracy. Reading the comments and following the links has been very useful to me, as people have very different takes on the issue.

Personally, I'm looking to buy a new laptop for when I start classes this August. I have a "desktop replacement" by Toshiba which is great when it works but is also pretty finicky. It's failed on me several times since I got it, including times during grad school when I really, really could have used it. It's not reliable enough to use as my main computer. However, I could use it as my "home" computer at my apartment and use the new one for research and in class. I went to Virginia Tech and technology was obviously stressed and implemented into many of my courses. At the same time, though, I only ever used my laptop in class once throughout my bachelor's and master's degrees, and that was to look up a picture of something we were discussing in class to explain the concept. I always took notes by hand, and I always made my outlines by hand on unlined paper before typing them up into a paper.

Actually, that's not quite true. I had a Palm Pilot with a full-sized keyboard my Freshman year, and not only did it make me look like a dork, but it also severely restricted my ability to take notes. I'm also told that in most professional schools (and colleges!) you can't have your laptop in front of you. If you can't use it in the courtroom, either, then it would seem that relying on it in the classroom might prevent you from developing and maintaining your notetaking by hand skills, to the detriment of your courtroom performance. Your computer hacking skills might get better, although I doubt there'd be an effect on your bowhunting or nunchuck skills.

Don't get me wrong: a wizard presentation using available technology could be really useful in the courtroom, although at the same time I'm not sure how comfortable I am with the idea of using eye candy to convince a judge or jury unless the other side is doing so as well, as it seems kind of unfair. I know I'm naive and inexperienced, but I don't want justice to be subverted just because someone has l337 skillz (is good with computers). I like the idea of being able to instantly look up information, and having a computer with me in class as a reference sounds pretty useful, but as a notetaking medium I'm not so sure.

Why Not Apply Everywhere?

Okay, so here were my basic stats:
UGPA: 2.97 (Virginia Tech)
LSAT: 166

Those are the two most easily quantified factors. As for my "intangibles" :
-bachelor's degree in Political Science from a science & technology school, albeit a major state university with a positive reputation
-master's degree in education with a GPA of 3.47
-one semester of academic probation
-Virginia resident
-"legacy" connections at Richmond and William & Mary
-several instances of community service with continued interest (doing the same thing several times)
-solid extracurriculars (band, campus ministry)
-leadership positions in extracurriculars and community service
-good letters of recommendation
-good writing sample on LSAT
-good personal statement

I decided that I wasn't interested in attending any large programs, such as those with more than 250 students per class. I also wasn't really interested in schools outside the Southeast. I visited American, Emory, George Mason, Georgia, Richmond, Tennessee, Wake Forest, and Villanova and realized that I didn't really like private schools and eliminated all but Richmond from my list. I also learned very early from Richmond that I had been accepted and so there was no reason for me to apply to any safety schools, as Richmond is a good school. I narrowed my list to George Mason, Georgia, Richmond, Tennessee, and William & Mary (although I only applied to W&M because my parents wanted me to, as I considered it such a reach that I figured that I was simply throwing away my $50). This small list, especially as most were public schools, saved me several hundred dollars in application fees.

Let me stress for a moment how important it is to visit the schools. If you're not comfortable at the school you're not going to do well. You need to know if you're okay with an urban campus, with a place surrounded by miles and miles of nothingness, and even if you like the architecture. The first four of the schools where I applied each had advantages and disadvantages, but it was William & Mary where everything just clicked for me. There were areas where each school rivalled W&M, but there was no other school in my list that beat it in any category, let alone rivalled it in every way. It has a wonderful faculty, a gorgeous and relaxed setting, a solid reputation, and I would pay in-state tuition.

Not everyone will see my criteria as important. For some law school is simply a springboard, and the place with the most prestige and highest-paid job prospects is where they want to be. Others are tied to a specific area or need scholarships to be able to attend. Know what you want, and go for it.

The LSAT

There are a lot of ideas on how best to prepare for the LSATs, including spending hundreds of dollars on prep classes by groups such as Kaplan. I'm pretty good at taking standardized tests and, furthermore, I didn't want to spend $500+ on the type of preparation that doesn't usually work for me. Instead, I went to the LSAC's website and ordered their actual past LSAT tests and practiced on those for several weeks before the December administration of the test.

If you're going to take the LSAT, my advice is simply to take actual former LSATs. Skip everything else, especially practice LSATs that were simply made up and aren't authentic. Time yourself, but give yourself a little less time than you will actually get (I used 30 minutes when I knew I'd actually have 35). For each section I recorded how much time it took me and how many of the questions I got right, plus when it was taken. This taught me that it was very important to my abilities to take the test after a good night's rest, to eat right, and to stay in practice, as my scores after staying up late, eating a lot of junk food, or not practicing for a few days were always lower. It also gave me a realistic understanding of what I'd get, as my scores consistently were between 160 and 169 (not absolutely amazing but still very good). The Logical Reasoning and Reading Comprehension sections were easy for me, but remember to read the questions carefully. From timing my sections I came to realize that I would have plenty of time to read each question carefully, and doing so helped bump up my score by a handful of points. It was the Analytical Reasoning ("logic games") section which gave me trouble.

For the Analytical Reasoning section, I didn't even finish it within the time limit for the first several practice tests I took. There were two main reasons for this. The first was that I was trying to diagram out every part of the question, rather than simply trying to find the answer to what was being asked. The second was that I wasn't recognizing patterns. The AR section tends to have four sets of questions, with six or seven per set. The first question in each set can usually be figured out without even creating a rudimentary diagram, as four of the five options can be eliminated directly (for instance, knowing that "Amy" can't be the answer for who is present on Wednesday because you are given the condition "Amy must only work on Monday"). In case you missed it, the names are usually one per letter, such as Amy, Betty, Carol, Denise, Emily, and so on, which means that you can simply identify them by letter when you diagram (each second is valuable). Remember that the questions in each set get harder and that each set is harder than the one before it. Don't spend too long on each question; if you can eliminate two answers but are stuck, guess. There's no penalty. You may also want to bring an analog watch (no danger of beeping) with you to the test. At about a minute or even just thirty seconds before the end of the section, guess on any questions you haven't already answered. If you've got five left the odds are you'll guess at least one right, and that could be a whole point on your final score. Again, there's no penalty, so even getting them all wrong doesn't hurt you.

It's very important to keep your mind in shape. Take at least one practice test a day in the weeks before the test, and take two if possible. You want to do the entire test in one sitting and you want to shut out all distractions such as TV or your phone (although taking one or two with distractions may be helpful to help you learn how to shut out noises like someone with a sniffly nose, the person who taps their pencil as they think, or a creaky air conditioner).

If you prepare then there's no reason not to be confident when you go in, so long as you're realistic. I knew I'd prepared and that I'd done well on standardized tests in the past, and so I was relaxed. I'd already printed out my LSAT admission ticket and laid out my clothes for that day the night before and I had three mechanical #2 pencils. I didn't expect to get a 180, but I also knew that even if my mind completely went blank I would probably get at least a 155 (my lowest practice score was a 157 taken under terrible conditions). Don't concentrate on wanting a certain score so as to get into a specific score; do your best and take it from there.

Why Would I Want to Go to Law School?

Well, I originally didn't. I entered Virginia Tech as a biology major with the intent of becoming a veterinarian or physician. Although both of my parents attended law school, I simply wasn't interested. I graduated with a degree in Political Science, but having had taken classes focusing more on theory and international politics, along with a minor in history. I had it in my head that I wanted to teach social studies, and so I went on to earn my M.A.Ed from VT. For a variety of reasons, including No Child Left Behind and the Virginia Standards of Learning (SOL) testing, I decided not to pursue teaching. I substitute taught in the local public schools, and during one day when I did not have a job I, out of boredom, took a practice LSAT from a book my roommate had. Having had no preparation, I did very, very well on it and it occurred to me that maybe, just maybe, my skills, talents, and interests would best be satisfied by studying and practicing law. I also considered eventually trying to pursue a Ph.D or Th.D down the line, but I finally came to decide that a JD would give me both the academic background to pursue further studies and write and also the ability to better act and help others. In my next post I'll discuss my applications process.

An Introduction

My name is Robert Bauer, and this is my new blog. I formerly ran the blog HokiePundit, but that eventually collapsed in on itself. I will be attending law school at William & Mary this fall (2007), and this blog is for that time. Why not just restart HokiePundit? I felt as though a fresh start would be best, while not disowning what I've written before. My first set of posts will be about my decision to attend law school and the application process.