Law School Discussion

Seriously. Too bad it isn't seen as one. 20+ hrs a week, for over 2 years, while in college? Come on; if having a long-term SO doesn't indicate that you are dedicated, hard-working, and able to work with other people, I don't know what does.

So, who wants to join the "I have a SO club"? There are still executive positions available--which would look GREAT on your law school application, by the way 

Quote from: esoteric on February 05, 2005, 06:29:51 PM

I am absolutely hopeless on level 6.  I see that the source code says "ASCII is an alternative," the address is "backwards" backwards, and the site you attempt to log into is "anagram." But I cannot figure out how any of this makes sense!

Check the bottom left hand corner of the screen.

I see nothing? i'm not even sure what the hell the image is im looking at!

I currently use a 12" Powerbook G4, and have had Macs my entire life.  Here are some reasons why I prefer them:

1) They virtually never crash.  Unix-based OS = stability.  No blue screen of death; if a program crashes, it doesn't crash the entire computer.
2) Ease of use.  There's a reason that Macs used to corner the education market. Even a 5 year old can figure his way around one. Things just make sense; you don't need a 1000page manual to figure out how to perform simple tasks.
3) Aesthetics. They just look better--both the computer itself and the operating system.  This isn't a very big deal for most people though.

Now, I hear that Apple computers aren't very useful in many law schools because the test-taking software is Windows only.  That is a pretty significant negative.  Otherwise, there's not much to complain about with Macs except possibly their price. Just about everyone who uses Macs love them; three of my friends have already switched over to Apple after using my computer.  I highly recommend them for just about everything, except gaming, and apparently, law school test-taking.

80-100hr weeks? People are EXCITED about that?

Yeah, I agree. Someone look up the stats, or I will later.

My argument is that there is a distinction between admission and applications- those admitted to HYSC, in general, probably went to Ivy/top 50s. Those who applied are likely from all over the place. A third tier toilet student with a 174 and a 3.7 is still going to apply to Harvard.

Do you mean that those already admitted to HYSC went to Ivy/Top 50s, or that most of those that will be admitted throughout the cycle are from Ivy/Top 50s?

Hope this was coherent.