Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Ryn last won the day on September 13

Ryn had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2098 Good People

About Ryn

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

5783 profile views
  1. Yes but typically upper years are more challenging and thus a better gauge of academic ability and odds of success in law school.
  2. Do they ask about languages in the sketch? I don’t remember that.
  3. I’d ask that we stop talking about Newfoundland and focus on the topic of the thread.
  4. You may have an access claim for your family situation if you can show that your grades would otherwise have been competitive. That may be tough to prove but it’s in your court to argue. You may want to reach out to the schools and ask if they’d consider an access claim on those grounds. Aside from that, ECs, whether in social justice or otherwise, don’t really matter with grades that low. I’d stop focusing on that and look at what my options were vis a vis an access claim, or perhaps going back to school as you previously suggested. Alternatively, you can forget law school for the time being and get work experience, then apply as a mature student once you meet those requirements (5–7 years out of undergrad, typically, but varies by school). In the latter scenario, law schools are more likely to overlook grades, particularly in your personal circumstances, than if you apply right now. In any event, I think you have a number of options but truthfully, getting admitted this next cycle: (1) without an access claim is basically nil; and (2) with a successful access claim, is still going to be very, very challenging.
  5. Whether you have an access claim depends on your circumstances. If it’s only that you worked while going to school, that is very likely not sufficient. I can’t imagine that anything a prof can say can offset a 2.7. What’s your L2? If it’s substantially higher, say 3.5–3.8 then you may have a shot somewhere.
  6. I’m also at a midsize OCI firm and it’s the same. 10 hours for students and associates is a typical day and in certain months the daily average goes up quite a bit. On the other hand, around the holidays you can leave at like 4 on some days if you decide to not take the time off in the first place, so that’s an advantage.
  7. No I haven’t released the formulas for the most recent predictor. But, for the first predictor I wrote back in 2015, I included all the formulas in one of my posts for the thread. If you go back to it you can probably find it.
  8. I agree with this. I will add that I do know the admissions officers will reject people who have absolutely no chance of being accepted (e.g., very low stats and no Part B considerations cited). That, at least, was my understanding when I was on the committee. But those are rare, because people who have low stats typically cite something in Part B, whether medical or equitable conditions. Those files are always reviewed by the committee. If I posted something here to make you (@ScipioAfricanus) believe that there's an absolute cutoff in all circumstances, that wasn't my intention. I meant to convey the above.
  9. As far as I know it hasn’t changed. I had one class in 2L with a closed book exam but everyone knew going in and there were other sections of the same course taught by other profs that were open book.
  10. I have a tech background, so I can say with relative confidence that we are a long way off from being able to automate many of the processes that lawyers do. Natural language processing is one thing, but even that is struggling with a lot of simple concepts. We can make it work on a low level ("oh hey, I see that this email says something was shipped to you, so I'll put it on your calendar" or "I get that you asked me what time it was in a really round-about manner, so I'll say the time I suppose") -- and I'll grant you that even this low level is exceptionally impressive compared to a decade ago. But the kind of analytics required to fully automate things like contract drafting, discovery, writing memos or pleadings, and so on, is quite a ways off. All of those things require nuanced understandings of tons of relevant facts, case law, and critical thinking. AI can superficially make surface-level connections in language, but it is not yet capable of abstract thought, which is what is necessary to automate these things (and many other service professions or knowledge-economy careers). I'd say we're at least two generations away from that, if we'll even see it in our lifetime. It's incredibly difficult to accomplish this with our current level of tech and understanding of the science behind it. I mean, we don't even really know how neural networks work. What I mean by that is, we obviously understand the math behind the concept, but once you train a neural net, the result is so incredibly complex that we don't actually know, to the fine detail, how it's getting the answers it gets. We're just happy that the answers are correct. Now, obviously, no one could have predicted that we'd get so good at even the low-level machine learning stuff we're doing now in such a short period of time. We may be surprised in a decade or so -- maybe we will make leaps and bounds of progress. But while I'm optimistic about the advancement of this kind of tech, I am also a realist, and my sense is that we'll make it there eventually but not for a good long while. Even if we do, there's the human element. Market forces are one thing, but part of the practice of law is dealing with the government, and the government works at its own pace. As others have said, all you need to look at is how "automated" courts are today. Which is to say that they're not. They're like, 15 years behind. And they will continue to be. I am happy that they are doing this, but I think it's ultimately just a marketing ploy. Teaching coding takes time, at least to the point that it becomes a useful skill you'll actually leverage. And you won't be taking the time in a law school, not really. Two or three courses in three years is not going to do it. A bootcamp is definitely not going to accomplish anything. As I said once before when this topic came up, I don't think you need a CS degree to write macros in Excel, but a bootcamp course in programming isn't going to teach you how to do it usefully, either.
  11. They should have a rule where you can't name two things the same thing. XD Thanks for the clarification!
  12. You know that Schulich isn't a law school, right?
  13. I'm sorry, but this is a stupid reason to select a law school to go to, given all the other things going for the various other law schools in Ontario. If this is solely your criteria in deciding where to go to school, I cannot help but say it is a dumb reason. The other stuff you mentioned have value, namely proximity to family and support systems (including financial support). Those are valid reasons for wanting to stay in Toronto. The opportunities piece is tired, because it's frequently brought up in these discussions but I don't think has demonstrable value. I don't think a person would have better access to biglaw opportunities coming out of Toronto versus not. I mean, just look at the background of the lawyers in the largest law firms in the city; I think you'll see a healthy group of them are going to be from Queen's, Ottawa, and Western. But even if we grant, for a moment, that going to school in Toronto gives you a substantial leg-up in getting into one of these coveted firms, I doubt Ryerson grads would start appearing at the top of any list for quite a while simply because no one knows who they are, making this consideration largely irrelevant for the moment. I barely mentioned prestige. I even put an "ugh" after it to signify how little it mattered and how unfortunate I thought it was that we were even bringing it up. I think you should focus on the other considerations I've now recited at least twice, which I think are far more important. They certainly outweigh, in my opinion, proximity to downtown Toronto by a huge margin.
  14. I think you're putting way too much importance on location. But I mean, if law applicants are so shallow that they prize going to school in downtown Toronto over virtually any other criteria then I suppose you'll be correct. I have faith that people aren't that stupid but I've been surprised about that before. I also should point out that prestige, though a small factor for most people, is still a factor. But history of contribution to jurisprudence, school culture, academic achievement, and alumni network strength are likely far more important considerations for most people.
  15. Ryn

    Suits For Men

    I haven't encountered it with any of mine and I wear them every day. I would think it's the fabric, but it would be surprising on a high-end suit. You'd think the fabric would be decent quality.
  • Create New...