I have been working on the University of Michigan Native American Law Student Association’s website in my spare time and I think it’s worth having a look. I just got the podcast up and running today, so if you are interested in hearing our latest guest speakers, please subscribe in iTunes or your favorite podcast software.
The podcast URL is: http://students.law.umich.edu/nalsa/?feed=podcast or find us on iTunes.
Torts is finished and since I am having trouble studying for Constitutional Law right now, I thought I might decompress here for a sec. First of all, congrats to everyone in Hershovitz’s Torts class and good luck on your remaining finals.
Torts was a fun class. Professor Hershovitz was an excellent compliment to my Law and Economics class because he approached the Law from a moralist perspective and encouraged us to consider the possibility that it’s more than cheapest cost avoiders or maximizing social welfare.
Another cool thing about the class was that it was Professor Hershovitz’s first class he has taught. So during this year, my section had the privilege of seeing one professor (Soper) conclude his career and another professor begin his. It was a unique experience.
About the finals in general: Law school finals consist of approximately 50 adults in a room, hunched over their laptops, franticly tapping their keyboards as quickly as they can type, and usually loaded down with a stack of books at their sides (for comfort- the books are rarely used since there is no time for that). When I pulled my earplugs out and took a deep breath in the middle of this chaos, it’s was a fairly surreal experience. Considering the fact that we pay for this privilege, it’s almost comical. I thought, “What would a hunter-gather think about this scene?” I would sort of like to ask that question, but I already have a good idea on what they would say.
With the presidential primaries in full swing, it has been increasingly difficult for me to avoid discussing national politics here. I made this exception for two reasons: 1) I enjoy reading the webcomic xkcd and this post is an opportunity to share the webcomic with people visiting my site. 2) I am concerned about technology policy.
Okay, first of all who or what is xkcd? It’s actually a pretty funny webcomic, somewhat similar to Dilbert, but interpreted through the perspective of a stick-figure drawing physics major. Go check it out, and stop by the author’s website where he makes out a case for Obama:
Obama has shown a real commitment to open government. When putting together tech policy (to take an example close to home for xkcd) others might have gone to industry lobbyists. Obama went to Lawrence Lessig, founder of Creative Commons (under which xkcd is published) and longtime white knight in the struggle with a broken system over internet and copyright policy. Lessig was impressed by Obama’s commitment to open systems — for example, his support of machine-readable government information standards that allow citizens’ groups to monitor what our government is up to. Right now, the only group that can effectively police the government is the government itself, and as a result, it’s corrupt to the core. Through these excellent and long-overdue measures, Obama is working to fight this corruption.
Obviously there are many reasons to choose a particular president, and technology policy is just one small concern among many. If technology policy (e.g. the internet) is important to you though, I would encourage you to check out Barack’s website for more information on his policies.
Brent Barton is a genuine class act. Although I wish he were running to represent us here in Michigan, the good news is that he will undoubtably do great things for my friends and family in Oregon. Check out his campaign website, spread the word, and consider voting for him if you are in District 51.
To silence my critics: a new post. I read this a few months ago but it’s still worth sharing. Dan Kaminsky did a dot-plot visualization of the US Code, the Windows kernel, and a collection of 17000 free books. The results are fascinating. Apparently the US Code is aptly named. Check out the results.
Law school is pretty cool so far. Tons and tons of reading but I like the classes so that makes the studying tolerable. Right now I am on fall break and it has been thoroughly enjoyed. After a couple weeks of school, I needed a reprieve. The rest has been nice because I can stay afloat for most of the time, but at least once or twice a week I am up until 2 or 3am trying to get ready for class the next day. It’s relentless.
In general, I feel like I am “getting it” but since the classes are all on a curve, that may not be enough. You have to get it, know it, and apply it on the final. There is basically one thing that’s graded, and that’s the final.
My analogy of law school is that it’s like you are learning a trade—say carpentry—and all day you read about carpentry, then you go to class and listen to carpentry lessons, but at the end of the semester you get a pile of wood with some tools and the professor says “make something.” The trick I guess is to make something better than the rest of the students, and something your professor actually wanted you to make with that type of wood. It’s a weird way to learn the Law, but the funny thing is that they really don’t teach you the Law (you just have to learn that yourself). Instead they teach you to *think* like a lawyer.
I’ve explained it to engineering colleges in a slightly different way: so in a programming class, the professor teaches you all about why object oriented programing might be better than action-oriented languages, but when the final comes around they just give you some specs and ask you to write an actual program. Fun stuff.
The cost for me to attend one year of law school is over $58000. That number includes everything: out-of-state tuition, fees, books, living expenses, health insurance, etc. The cost of tuition and fees alone is ~$42000 annually.
I will be in classes roughly 320 hours this year so depending on which costs you use, my out-of-pocket expense is between $130 and $180 per hour of lecture. Those numbers are still somewhat arbitrary because they do not count all the activities the school provides, i.e. office hours, gym facilities, etc., but I find this range to be a practical measure of value. Admittedly, I ignored opportunity costs and other considerations because they are so subjective and I would rather leave the heavy lifting for my accounting friends.
Given the expense of law school, I am extremely grateful for the Ford Family Foundation for making this experience possible. I was going to law school one way or another, but the Ford Family Foundation made it possible to do much earlier.
On a related note- the good news is that it just got a little easier to be a student:
Under the legislation, Pell Grants will be increased gradually over the next five years. The cut in the interest rate for student loans from 6.8 percent to 3.4 percent will also be phased in, and will only apply to new loans. Republicans were quick to point out yesterday that the rate will revert to the higher percentage after four years.
This is going to be a quick update on what has happened so far.
Books. Wow, things have not gotten any cheaper since I was last at school. When the bookstore cashier was ringing me up, I asked her what the biggest single purchase was. Apparently someone spent $1500 on books, so of course they were buying law books! Most of the people in my section spent between $500 - $600 on books this semester. I was lucky and scraped by with $300. My advice is to buy directly from older students if possible.
Section Assignment: I am in section I which means I will have classes on Contracts, Property, and Civil Procedure this Fall.
Reading: A lot. I’m not sure on the exact total number of pages for the first week, but I would estimate approximately 150. The reading is difficult, slow, and sometimes counterintuitive. You read one judge’s opinion and it sounds reasonable, and then read another completely contrary opinion which sounds just as good. My favorite quote regarding the reading is that, “it’s like stirring cement with your eyelashes.” That may be true, but I find the cases to be pretty interesting.
Misc. Activities: Today, as part of orientation, my section is going to assist with an outdoor clean-up and beautification at Eliza Howell Park in Detroit.
First things first, I am by no means endorsing drinking and driving with this post. With that said, onto the story…
CNET is reporting that the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled a defendant has a right to see the source code of the Intoxilyzer 5000EN breathalyser.
From CNET:
An article in the Pioneer Press quoted his attorney, Jeffrey Sheridan, as saying the source code was necessary because otherwise “for all we know, it’s a random number generator.” It is hardly new technology: One criminal defense attorney says the Intoxilyzer is based on the antique Z-80 microprocessor.
After reading the CNET story, I started to explore exactly how Mr. Sheridan might mount a defense using the source code. If I were the lawyer, how would I inspect the code?
So that’s it for the software. How about the hardware schematics? What about the tolerances of each hardware component and sensors? The list goes on…
I am glad to see that the Minnesota Supreme Court has made the source code available in this case. However, possessing the source code is not a get out of jail free card. Ultimately, the breathalyser is an analytical instrument. It can be tested against a known sample or another instrument and shown to be functioning correctly. My guess is that the “source code defense” was more likely an attempt to force the state into non-compliance, thereby removing the breathalyser as admissible evidence.
It will be interesting to see how this case impacts closed-source electronic voting machines.
A couple months ago, I watched a preview on a new 3D photo visualization tool from Microsoft’s live labs crew. The following presentation took place at TED:
After watching the video, I remained somewhat skeptical. My biggest contention was that it just would not work (conveniently) within the current web paradigm. The vision algorithms and processing required to create these 3D models seemed to be a fairly insurmountable hurdle for any substantially large system. However, after visiting the MS live labs Photosynth site few days ago, I am now convinced that this technology may change the way we use photos.
Just the other day I uploaded numerous pictures of my new apartment for friends and family. Flickr is a great tool for photo sharing, but Photosynth could drastically improve the experience by translating those apartment pictures into a virtual 3D tour. Photosynth could potentially replace some types of 3D immersion tools altogether. Using technologies similar to Fotowoosh, outdoor photos can be converted into 3D textures which could then be mapped back into the Photosynth data set and render a fully textured 3D model.
In keeping with the subject matter of this website, I hesitated on posting this topic because it’s too new to have any apparent legal controversies right now. Perhaps some privacy concerns or copyright issues will arise in the future. I suppose we will find out what the legal ramifications are when Microsoft develops a business model for this technology. In the meantime, if you are on a Windows machine, go check out the demo and videos on the Photosynth site. You will have to install an Active X object if you want to try the demo, but it’s fairly painless and well worth it.
© EE to JD. Powered by WordPress using the DePo Clean Theme.
