Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Actual 1L

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 32
1
Acceptances / Re: Kent v. Loyola
« on: March 31, 2006, 12:40:42 AM »
The new numbers seem to validate the thinking that Kent is on the rise and Loyola is in decline. Loyola really looks in jeopardy of possibly falling behind DePaul.

This could not be further from the truth.

2
As a side note on suits and appearances and what-not.  I work for a small firm - 10 attorneys, 7 are men.  Of the 7 men, 3 are slobs and 3 aren't slobs, but aren't otherwise particularly well dressed.  The only one who is a spiffy dresser is also the only one with biglaw experience.  I'm not sure if that says that biglaw goes after spiffy dressers or if spiffy dressers feel drawn to biglaw.  Probably neither, but I thought I'd mention it anyway.

Most big law firms have very strict dress codes in which you can get in some serious trouble if you do not abide by it.  Going through that for a few years probably rubs off on most associates.

3
Reviews, Visits, and Rankings / Re: Chicago Kent Review
« on: March 10, 2006, 07:13:56 AM »
I went to the Kent open house on the 4th as well, and I have to agree...I wasn't all that impressed.  I don't want to to IP and that really seemed to be the schools main strong point.  Yeah, it's in Chicago and yeah, you'll probably be able to find a job in the city if you go there, but other than that, nothing really struck my fancy.  Not to mention the free pens they gave out didn't work.  Another interesting thing about Kent that I've heard from a few current students...they give out scholarships to many of their admitted students that are automatically renewed if the student stays in the top 10%-20% of the class.  What they don't tell you is that more than 10%-20% of the class has these scholarships, which means that somebody has to lose out.  Kind of shady if you ask me

That's true.  The most accurate numbers I have heard are 40% of the class gets money contingent upon staying in the top 25%.

4
I mostly prefer Emanuels keyed to your specific casebook.  I use them exclusively, except for Property where Gilberts is probably a little better.

5
I'm on spring break, so I have some time.  I'll do a little Westlaw research into the issue over the next few days and try to dig up some stuff.  My interest has been piqued.

6
Act1, thanks for the legality notice, it's not something I'd thought of.  I do pay for the internet I broadcast, does that make it legal?  If not, why is this illegal?  If what I do is legal, is it illegal for other people to use my paid-for signal; by not securing it, do I not imply tacit consent for others to use my paid-for signal?

It's actually something that could probably be debated, but I think it'd be found to be illegal.  I liken it to an artist creating a song and selling it on CD.  The consumer can buy the CD, but cannot give a copy of that song away to someone else.  I'd have to take a look to see if there have been any cases litigated in this area.  I doubt there are as I do not think many service providers are spending time/effort to do so.

Hopefully, when Google takes over the world, WiFi will be free everywhere.  As it stands, I think within 5-10 years major cities will have it.  Chicago is apparently close.

7
General board for soon-to-be 1Ls / Re: $$$$
« on: March 08, 2006, 11:15:17 AM »
I'm more worried about liking my job, which I am pretty sure I will.  If you are going into law with the idea that you will hate it, have fun living a miserable life.

8
i plan to drive around with my wireless laptop until i find a signal strong enough to use.  or sit in barnes and noble all day.

Sadly you have to pay for b&n.

9

Of course, educated people secure their connections.


Yup.  And I'd go a step further to say that educated people don't access unsecured networks.  Too much bad sh*t can happen, starting with people accessing your computer and making your life hell.

Don't throw around a word like "educated" in such a manner.  I'm a professional technology consultant, and I broadcast my unsecured wireless signal for everyone in my apartment complex to use.  It helps that it's a company laptop I'm using, because a) it has kick-ass anti-virus security; b) my data is backed up daily; and c) if it did get seriously hosed, there's always the company IT guys to clean up my messes (haven't made any yet).

So while I know my situation is different, don't assume that nobody who knows anything about computers could possibly do such a thing as broadcast an unsecured wireless connection.  Some of us just aren't that concerned.  I know better than to keep my personal information (passwords, SSN, etc.) stored in my browser, so I'm not really worried about having anything useful on my laptop to steal - if somebody wants to copy my music files, that's fine with me.

The internet is overpriced, and it should be shared more broadly - the digital divide only perpetuates our current socioeconomic inequalities.  Of course, most people on the other side don't have PCs with wireless cards anyway, but I enjoy my feigned magnanimity . . .

Sorry about the confusion.  I did not mean educated in that manner.  I simply used it b/c I was replying to a post that used it.  I will use the word legal instead.  Those who want to abide by laws should not either broadcast free internet nor connect through an unsecured line.  It is not legal.  We are moving toward a day when internet will be cheap or free, but right now that is not the case.

10
I never said I did it, I pay for my internet.  Just saying its possible.

Did not mean to say you did.  Was just commenting in general.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 32