AboutEntriesCalendarBooks
Use this menu to select your favorite style:
Three Years of Hell Classic The Eyes Have It
Categories
1L Summer: Japan
2L Summer: Hong Kong
2L Summer: London
Bar Exam and BarBri
Blogs and Blogging
Classes: Administrative Law
Classes: Civ Pro
Classes: Contracts
Classes: Criminal Law
Classes: Federal Tax
Classes: Foundations of Reg. State
Classes: General
Classes: Legal Methods
Classes: Moot Court
Classes: Perspectives on Legal Thought
Classes: Tax Seminar
Classes: Torts
Classes: Clinic
Classes: Constitutional Law
Classes: Corporations
Classes: Japanese Law
Classes: Professional Responsibility
Classes: Property
Classes: The Note
Debt and Destruction
Dorm Life
Employment and Job Searching
Gadgetry
Law Review
Legal thoughts
Letters to Wormwood (Advice for JD2Bs)
Life After Columbia
Life at Columbia
Life in New York
Lighter thoughts
Pre-School Reading
Preparations
Reading, Viewing, and other Diversions
Resolutions and Resolution Tracking
Ridiculous Bipartisanship
Vacationing
Recent Entries
And like that... he is gone
And for those without blogs...
Advice for 1Ls Starting a Blog: A Much Shorter Part II
Welcome to the Continuum! or Passing the Torch
Down to the Wire

Monthly Archives
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
About TYoH
Associates and Searches
December 2010
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31  

The Columbia Continuum


Tuesday, 15 May

14:00

Avoid Feeling Depressed While Learning by Mathematics Blog posted


Actually, homework to reinforce concepts learned earlier in class and to go to school the next day. But, sometimes we feel too difficult when do it. How to get math help problems? There is a very easy to solve math homework, that is using math help. With the help of professionals, students can have all the math homework help they need. When seeking help support services such as math problems, students can use the internet for this search. Through the internet have widely spread services that provide assistance in learning and work relations, students do not need any more trouble to complete school assignments that almost made them mad. With the help of homework assistance, students can truly be free from any hassle.

With so many sites homework assistance, students need not wonder anymore how to solve probability tasks. Students can use the probability help as a way out. Much information can actually allow students to solve their problems. And all services that are available on the site of homework help. In addition, the site also provides plenty of practice problems with step-by-step solutions and answers. Most students seek help in mathematics and science in the site of homework help. It's a way that will help students to avoid feeling depressed while learning.

Wednesday, 09 May

19:00

Write a Paper without Spending So Much Time by Mathematics Blog posted

What is writing paper? Why do graduate students often complain of liability writing paper? And why the professors compete to publish the paper. From what I know, paper is probably the only medium to show the work for educational to the public, especially people who are struggling in the field of research, that any scientific field. Paper is the path to major projects which of course has a large budget. Paper can be interpreted as an academic paper contains a discussion of a particular topic with the support of valid data, robust and reliable.

Writing paper is to generate a discussion on a particular theme with the support of a strong enough argument. To produce a good paper, you have to do research, namely the investigation of your topic by reading. Sources can include reading books, magazines, newspapers or from internet sources. Information you get from these various sources would you use to support the points (argument or statement) that you wrote in your paper.

Of course as a student are given tasks such as paper by teachers or lecturers. Sometimes, we are lazy to make paper. There are ways how you can make a good paper without having waste your time. You can use a term paper writing service. They will work according to your desire. The theme of the paper can be according to your demands. They were professional in their field. You do not have to worry about the content of the paper is made. They will make the original paper.

Complete the task of making paper in addition to spending time also requires a lot of thought that is extra. For those of you who feel less able to solve it you can use a term paper help. They will do a very good quality paper and you can get good value for the end result. You can search for services help to write this paper on the internet. They provide these services at very affordable price.

Monday, 16 April

23:00

How to Write a Paper to Enroll In University? by Mathematics Blog posted

Paper can be interpreted as an academic paper contains a discussion of a particular topic with the support of valid data, robust and reliable. How to write a college term paper?

Write the paper in order to be read by others. When writing a paper you have to remember that your writing will be noticed by others and that you are responsible with other people's experience in reading the paper that you write. Try to write your thoughts as clearly as possible and avoid the mistake of writing style, grammar and spelling. Avoid using words that are longer than three lines. A paper should have a clear argument and straight to the step thinking which is stated explicitly and in logical and clear transitions from one paragraph to another paragraph.

If you do research, you must write a research paper as proof that you do some research on it so that no claim by anyone else. How to write a college research paper? in short, depending on the form of a written paper, students can explain a number of arguments regarding the topics stated in the introduction, support all sources of information with a quote (direct or indirect), or by paraphrasing techniques. Describe each stage of the argument as clearly as possible before you describe the problems with the argument that you specify. Explain and support your statements with reference materials.

In addition to writing papers, students are sometimes given a task to write an essay. How to write a college essay? Find the subject (theory, concept, etc.) is the first step to a good essay. Without finding the subject in question, an essay will likely come out of the desired path (not focused). You also need to understand the problem. Issues to instruct you on what you should do after you find the subject: describe, explain, compare, and so on. When the process of writing, you must have convinced the subjects and issues that should be your answer.

Tuesday, 10 April

05:00

Protects Your Car and Your Financial With Insurance by Mathematics Blog posted

http://www.carinsurancerates.com/images/car.jpg
Vehicle can be insured against loss or damage caused by accident or fire and theft. Auto insurance calculator helps us to decide the amount of premium. Auto insurance not only helps in keeping the law but also protects the owner from financial loss. In case of accidents, fines can be applied for not having valid insurance. Auto insurance companies are very aggressive when it comes to selling their goods. That is why people take the time and effort to examine their offer to have the best deals in town. You should always do whatever you can to make sure that you only work with companies that you like when your money is at stake. Do not take risks with money that you spend.

The insurance premium was set on how the vehicle will be used. These companies follow certain standards and brand clients based on their driving record. A skilled driver usually avails discount auto insurance as a company to distinguish it carefully and be alert when driving. People who usually use public transportation or carpool to participate in the program receive favorable rates from insurance companies as well. Age to contribute to availing auto insurance discounts; people under the age of 25 who have a good academic record may qualify for lower premiums.

Sunday, 08 April

20:00

Life Insurance Is a Very Good Thing to Have by Mathematics Blog posted

http://www.lifeinsurancerates.com/images/icons_index_header.jpg
Life insurance is basically an agreement that a certain amount of money must be paid in a certain way for the recipient named on the death of the person whose life was insured. One type of life insurance is term life insurance, also known as temporary insurance. Life insurance is a very good thing to have because it protects your family's financial well-being. In the event that you are a sole worker, life insurance can pay your family your salary for years (depending on policy).
Life insurance may also cover funeral costs and therefore your death will not be a burden on your family. Insurance companies typically provide different types of policies are appropriate to different people. Discounts are available for insurance buyers. However, it is recommended that one should seek help from a financial expert to determine what type of life insurance policy is best suited for one, depending on their needs. Life insurance usually costs less than long-term life insurance for a short time the person will be insured. Premiums for term insurance policies are lower and often have a higher death benefit than most. This is because insurance companies are banking on the statistics that the insured will not be passed, during the term of the contract.

16:00

Quick Way to Earn Money by Mathematics Blog posted

http://www.easyonlinepaydayloan.com/images/index_5_13_11/img_form.png
Looking for a loan for the unpaid bills or finance charges that will come? Easy payday loans are a quick way to earn quick money. It is a service that helps a loan to help achieve all of your needs can be like rent, electricity bills, water supply bills, medical care and all the others without any difficulty. When was the need of fast cash without any delay, you can apply with cash loans without thinking twice.

Your credit record will not affect you at least to get approved for this loan. These are small loans that do not check the credit facility. Therefore, the lender who holds the good record or bad perfect record can take this loan without any obligation. This is an ideal loan when you need cash fast. The next payday is fixed as the date of payment. Although you can rollover the loan for a month, but it involves burdensome interest payments and you will not be advised to do so. Before taking this loan, you should read carefully the terms and conditions you must obey. Avoid debt traps on time to pay the loan on the due date. It is easy and simple application process that can meet your needs well on time.

Saturday, 07 April

16:00

Apply To the Instant Payday Advance by Mathematics Blog posted

http://www.personalcashadvance.com/images/index/cash_security_approval.jpg
Looking for instant financial help? Unexpected costs arise, but you do not have enough money on hand? Payday advance decision gives great relief. If you need cash and want instant answers, you need to apply to the instant decision loan advance. You can get cash from $100 to $ 1500 for a short period of two weeks until your next payday. But only that borrower who work and earn a monthly salary and have a valid bank checking account is entitled to this credit. Usually, the lenders make loans against post dated check of the loan amount plus interest charges on it. You can redeem the loan to repay the loan in cash. The main advantage of the payday advance is in the process of verification. Now to get the approval fast credit borrowers should not disclose their credit status in front of the lenders. Therefore, bad creditors have the same rights as other holders of good credit. The applicant does not require you to show proof of your credit and procedures fairly quickly and easily. Fast payday loans with no hassle, especially designed to deal with urgent short term without being invited. It is basically short term loans that can be secured against your paycheck on a post term.

Friday, 06 April

18:00

Need of Some Quick Cash by Mathematics Blog posted

http://www.powerpaydayloan.com/images/bg_4_28_10/main_bg.jpg
Payday loans offer short term financial assistance in their time of need. However, because payday loans are specifically designed for people who need money fast to their payday lending limit is usually only about 2 weeks to a month. This option does have some great advantages for someone in need of cash. This loan is very easy and can be done entirely online. And if all goes well and you are approved, you can have cash deposited into your bank account within twenty four hours. You can apply online, filling out an application that ask for all of your pertinent information. Some of the requirements you must meet are: You must be at least eighteen years old, must have an active bank account that at least three months, and have a salary.

This type of loan is also helpful for people who have bad credit. All that is normally required of a potential borrower is employment verification. An active bank account is three to six months and current address. If you can provide this information, then you may be eligible for a loan. So, do not let bad credit stop you from applying for a loan payment. If you find yourself in desperate need of some quick cash just take a pay day loan.

13:00

How to find cheap auto insurance? by Mathematics Blog posted

http://www.comparecarinsuranceonline.com/images/index_header.jpg 
http://www.comparecarinsuranceonline.com is offered to find car insurance to be relatively straightforward. There are several insurance comparison websites on the internet today, which lets you compare auto insurance quotes of various companies. You have to do is fill in personal information, details of your vehicle. You drive to the kind of coverage you want and based on the information you give, you will receive quotes from different auto insurance companies even without having to contact them individually.

Basically, the insurance company will not be detrimental to the insured. It's just another advantage of the vehicle insurance may not be financially, but rather on the moral advantage which the insured is more to feel safe and calm with a guarantee of insurance for any unforeseen calamity coming. In order to secure affordable car insurance, you must be willing to take the time to compare car insurance quotes. This can be done easily and without too much time or effort in an online insurance comparison website. Car insurance comparison site is a facility that allows you to get offers insurance products and other information related to insurance such as tips, articles or important news about insurance. It is help you to find a right company, best policy and obviously save your money.

Saturday, 24 March

20:00

How to Do Algebra by Mathematics Blog posted

Algebra can be a tough subject for anyone, but understanding one simple concept can change everything. If you truly understand what equals means, you can suddenly do algebra.

As a tutor of many dozens of people, I have found that many want to ask if they should subtract 5, or divide by 3. If they understood the concept of equals, these would not be questions. When you are doing algebra, the only purpose is determine what the variable value is, usually denoted by an x. So you could have:

2x+5=17

Now since we want to find out what x equals, we have to get it by itself, but to do so, we must make changes to the equation so that we get x=something.

However, we can do anything to the equation as long as we do it to both sides of the equation. This is because = means that the two sides of the equation do not have to look the same, but they are the same value. So whatever 2x+5 is, it is the same as 17. We just have to figure out which value of x makes that true. So we could start by getting the 2x by itself by subtracting 5, but don't forget, to make it equal, we have to do it to both sides.

2x+5=17
-5 -5
2x=12

Now we know that 2 x's are equal to 12. So if divide by 2, we will have x by itself.

2x=12
2 2

x=6

So now we have the answer. To get it, everything we did was done to both sides of the equation. Now, to clarify, if you are doing division of multiplication, it has to be done to all of the values on both sides. So let's say we have the following equation:

2x+3=7x-7
2 2 2

A good thing to do here would be to multiply by 2 so we don't have to deal with fractions, but again, we have to do it to everything on both sides, so we get:

2x(2)+3(2)=7x(2)-7(2)
2 2 2 which is the same as

4x+3=7x-7

So even though the 2x did not need to be multiplied by anything because it wasn't a fraction to start with, we still had to multiply it by 2 because we were doing it to both sides of the equation.

One way to think of equals is like a scale that you are trying to keep balanced. Let's say you have 10 lbs. on each side of the scale so that it is perfectly balanced, or equal. Now if we removed 1 lb. from one side, the scale would no longer be equal until we did it again to the other side. If we divided the weight on one side by 2, then we would have to do the same to the other to keep it balanced.

Free Math Worksheets on Converting Numbers by Mathematics Blog posted

Great, fun and free math worksheets should be able to present a mathematical problem in different ways. Math is after all nothing more than a numeric expression of some of life's simplest questions: How much money do I have left if I buy a soda? By the end of the week, how much of my daily allowance will I be able to save if I don't?

When a child learns to relate math to everyday questions, he will be great at it from the simplest addition all the way to trigonometry. To convert percentages, decimals and fractions is thus one essential skill. How much of an apple pie has been eaten? The answer to this question can be expressed in percentages, 50%; or in decimals, 0.5; or in fraction, ½. In other words, half of mom's delicious apple pie is gone. How many kids in school have done their homework? Again this can be answered in several ways: in percentages, 70%; or in ratio, 7:10; Both of these mean out of ten kids in class there are seven good ones who did and three not-so-good ones who didn't. The bottom line is that kids learn math much better when it makes sense.

Thus, the math worksheets which you get for your kids should include interesting word problems that help them with the practical application of the lessons they learn. It should also present the same problem in a variety of ways to ensure that a child's grasp of a subject is deeper and comprehensive.

There are several standard exercises which train students to convert percentages, decimals and fractions. Converting percentage to decimals for example is actually as simple as moving the decimal point two places to the left and losing the percent sign "%." Thus 89% is equal to 0.89. Expressed in fraction, that would be 89/100. When you drill kids to do this often enough, they learn to do conversion almost instinctively.

Ratios and proportions are likewise wonderful math lessons with plenty of interesting practical applications. If three pans of pizza, one kilo of spaghetti, two buckets of chicken can properly feed 20 hungry friends, then how much pizza, spaghetti and chicken does mom need to prepare for birthday party with 30 kids?

Wouldn't it be great if your child learned how to mathematically figure this out? To help train him, start by giving him lots of free math worksheets!

Studying the Basics of Graphing Linear Equation With Free Math Worksheets by Mathematics Blog posted

First, the Basics! The x axis of a graph refers to the horizontal line while the y axis refers to the vertical line. Together these lines form a cross and the point where they both meet is called the origin. The value of the origin is always 0. So if you move your pencil from the origin to the right, you are drawing a line across the positive values of the x axis, i.e., 1, 2, 3 and so on. From the origin to the left, you're moving across the negative values of the x axis, i.e., -1, -2, -3 and so on. If you go up from the origin, you are covering the positive values of the y axis. Going down from the origin, will take you to the negative values of the y axis.

How Do You Find Points In A Graph? This set of numbers (2, 3) is an example of an ordered pair. The first number refers to the value of x while the second number stands for the value of y. When ordered pairs are used to find points on the grid, they are called the coordinates of the point. In above example, the x coordinate is 2 while the y coordinate is 3. Together, they enable you to locate the point (2, 3) on the grid. What's the point of all this? Well, ever wondered how ships describe exactly where they are in the vastness of the ocean? To be able to locate places, people have to draw a grid over the map and describe points with the help of x and y coordinates. Why don't you give it a try? Imagine left side wall of your room to be y axis and the wall at your back to be the x axis. The corner that connects them both will be your origin. Measure both in feet. If I say stand on coordinates (3, 2), would you know where to go? That means from the corner (origin) you should move 3 feet to the right and 2 feet forward.

Graphing Linear Equations. If you have several sets of x and y coordinates, you can now draw lines on a graph. Free math worksheets can drill you on plotting x and y coordinates while graphing linear equation. A linear equation when drawn on a line graph always yields a straight line. Take "y = 2x + 1" for example - a linear equation. Assign any three numbers to x, and then solve for y. Whatever numbers you assign to x and whatever y comes out to be, you will end up with a straight line. Remember to practice on easier math worksheets first before moving on to writing a linear equation or to the systems of linear equations. Good luck!

Calculus - Derivatives by Mathematics Blog posted

Derivative is the central concept of Calculus and is known for its numerous applications to higher Mathematics. The derivative of a function at a point can be described in two different ways: geometrical and physical. Geometrically, the derivative of a function at a certain value of its input variable is the slope of the line tangent to its graph through the given point. It can be found by using the slope formula or if given a graph, by drawing horizontal lines toward the input value under inquiry. If the graph has no break or jump at that point, then it is simply the y value corresponding to the given x-value. In Physics, the derivative is described as a physical change. It refers to the instantaneous rate of change in the velocity of an object with respect to the shortest possible time it takes to travel a certain distance. In relation thereof, the derivative of a function at a point in a Mathematical view refers to the rate of change of the value of the output variables as the values of its corresponding input variables get close to zero. In other words, if two carefully chosen values are very close to the given point under question, then the derivative of the function at the point of inquiry is the quotient of the difference between the output values and their corresponding input values, as denominator gets close to zero (0).


Precisely, the derivative of a function is a measurement of how a function transforms with respect to a change of values in its input (independent) variable. To find the derivative of a function at a certain point, do the following steps:

1. Choose two values, very close to the given point, one from its left and the other from its right.

2. Solve for the corresponding output values or y values.

3. Compare the two values.

4. If the two values are the same or will approximately equal to the same number, then it is the derivative of the function at that certain value of x (input variable).

5. Using a table of values, if the values of y for those points to the right of the x value under question is approximately equal to the y value being approached by the y values corresponding to the chosen input values to the left of x. The value being approached is the derivative of the function at x.

6. Algebraically we can look for the derivative function first by taking the limit of the difference quotient formula as the denominator approaches zero. Use the derived function to look for the derivative by replacing the input variable with the given value of x.

How To Use Gaussian Elimination To Solve Three Simultaneous Equations by Mathematics Blog posted

This tutorial will explain how to apply the Gaussian Elimination Method to solving three simultaneous equations.

Gaussian Elimination is a process of steps used to solve simultaneous equations. As the name suggests it uses specific methods to eliminate variables in the equations until a single variable is left.

To start this tutorial we need first three simultaneous equations;

2X+3Y-4Z=20

5X-6Y+7Z=30

8X+9Y+10Z=100

We now have our three equations. We now need to turn these into a matrix. A matrix basically means a table. For Gaussian Elimination we use the following format for the matrix;

X1 | Y1 | Z1 | A1

X2 | Y2 | Z2 | A2

X3 | Y3 | Z3 | A3

Where X1 means the multiplier of X in the first equation and A1 means the answer, or equal to value of equation one.

Using this, our starting matrix will look like this;

2 | 3 | -4 | 20

5 | -6 | 7 | 30

8 | 9 | 10 | 100

Note that if the variable is deducted in the equation we take the negative into the table, e.g. the first equation has 4Z deducted, so in our matrix table we have negative four.

The aim of Gaussian Elimination is to turn this matrix into this;

1 | 0 | 0 | A Value

0 | 1 | 0 | A Value

0 | 0 | 1 | A Value

I will explain how we use this matrix later on, when we reach that stage.

How do we get our matrix table to this I hear you asking? To do this we can do specific operations to the rows in the matrix to work our way towards the goal matrix. These operations are;

    We can multiply or divide an entire row by any number.
    We can add or deduct any row to another.
    We can also substitute rows from earlier calculations back in.
    To simplify the matrix we can also swap any row with another.

On a side note if your starting matrix contains any zeros you may need to either modify the following steps or ignore them all together. For this tutorial I will focus on the above matrix.

To start with we will focus on making any row be the following;

1 | 0 | 0 | A Value

To do this we can start of by making the second column, the 'Y' column have the same value for both rows one and two.

The easiest way to reach this is to multiply the first row by the second row's 'Y' value;

(2x-6) | (3x-6) | (-4x-6) | (20x-6)

5 | -6 | 7 | 30

8 | 9 | 10 | 100

Now we do the same to make row two's 'Y' value be equal to the value we just calculated for row one. We do this by multiplying the entire row by row one's original 'Y' value.

-12 | -18 | 24 | -120

(5x3) | (-6x3) | (7x3) | (30x3)

8 | 9 | 10 | 100

Now we have rows one and two which both have the same value in the 'Y' column, we deduct row two from row one, which gives us this new matrix;

-27 | 0 | 3 | -210

15 | -18 | 21 | 90

8 | 9 | 10 | 100

We now have eliminated our first variable. Now we need to eliminate the 'Z' variable in the first row, but we cannot simply just repeat the process exactly because the other two rows have 'Y' values, if we do any deductions into row one we will get a 'Y' value again.

To combat this we need to eliminate the 'Y' variable from either the second or third row. To do this we use the same method as we did to remove the 'Y' variable from the first row, multiply the second row by the value of the third row's 'Y' variable and multiply the third row by the second row's 'Y' value;

-27 | 0 | 3 | -210

(15x9) | (-18x9) | (21x9) | (90x9)

(8x-18) | (9x-18) | (10x-18) | (100x-18)

To eliminate the 'Y' variable from row two simply deduct row three from row two. This gives us this matrix;

-27 | 0 | 3 | -210

279 | 0 | 369 | 2610

-144 | -162 | -180 | -1800

Now we have eliminated the 'Y' variable from the second row we can now use this row to eliminate the 'Z' variable from the first row.

You may see a pattern emerging here because we now use the same method as we have been; we need to make the 'Z' variable in rows one and two to have the same value. Like we have been doing, to do this we need to multiply the first row by the 'Z' value of the second row and multiply the second row by the 'Z' value from the first row;

(-27x369) | 0 | (3x369) | (-210x369)

(279x3) | 0 | (369x3) | (2610x3)

-144 | -162 | -180 | -1800

Now, like we have done before, deduct row two from row one, leaving us with the following matrix;

10800 | 0 | 0 | 85320

837 | 0 | 1107 | 7830

-144 | -162 | -180 | -1800

The final step we need to take on getting our first final row is to divide row one by its own 'X' value to leave us with the following matrix;

1 | 0 | 0 | 7.9

837 | 0 | 1107 | 7830

-144 | -162 | -180 | -1800

We now have our first final row!

We now have two paths which we must choose from. These are;

    Go Back to the original matrix and use the same methods focusing on getting a row with the 'X' and 'Z' eliminated, leaving only the 'Y' variable.
    Continue using the matrix above.

If you started out with a matrix that contained some zeros I would recommend that you take the first path, as I have done when I worked on the Simultaneous Equation Solver Program (free download).

For this tutorial we will be following the second path, as the first would only be a repeat of everything we have already done.

Looking at our latest matrix it is clear to me where I will be taking this tutorial next.

In the interest of doing the least possible steps we will now move on to making a row be this;

0 | 0 | 1 | A Value

We will come back to this row later on;

0 | 1 | 0 | A Value

This can be done in three simple steps. Looking at row two all we need to do is eliminate the 'X' value, as we have already eliminated the 'Y' value. As row one only has a 'X' value logic dictates we use this row.

For this step simply multiply row one by row two's 'X' value;

(1x837) | 0 | 0 | (7.9x837)

837 | 0 | 1107 | 7830

-144 | -162 | -180 | -1800

This gives us a new matrix which is this;

837 | 0 | 0 | 6612.3

837 | 0 | 1107 | 7830

-144 | -162 | -180 | -1800

Now like we have done before, we deduct row one from row two which will give us the following matrix;

837 | 0 | 0 | 6612.3

0 | 0 | 1107 | 1217.7

-144 | -162 | -180 | -1800

Now we have eliminated the 'X' value from the second row we now only have a 'Z' value. To finish this row off we simply divide row two by its 'Z' value, which leaves us with this matrix;

1 | 0 | 0 | 7.9

-144 | -162 | -180 | -1800

0 | 0 | 1 | 1.1

To simplify this matrix I have substituted the final values for row one back into our matrix, as well as this I have swapped over rows two and rows there.

We are now two-thirds complete, leaving just one row to go!

The final row is the easiest because we can use rows one and three to eliminate the 'X' and 'Z' values from row two.

To start this let's multiply row one by row two's 'X' value, leaving use this matrix;

-144 | 0 | 0 | -1137.6

-144 | -162 | -180 | -1800

0 | 0 | 1 | 1.1

Repeating a familiar step that we have done before, deduct row one from row two. This gives us the following matrix;

-144 | 0 | 0 | -1137.6

0 | -162 | -180 | -662.4

0 | 0 | 1 | 1.1

We now do the same again to remove the 'Z' value, so our matrix now looks like this;

1 | 0 | 0 | 7.9

0 | -162 | -180 | -662.4

0 | 0 | -180 | -198

I have substitute row ones final values back into the matrix to simplify the matrix.

For the final time we now deduct row three from row two, leaving use with this matrix;

1 | 0 | 0 | 7.9

0 | -162 | 0 | -464.4

0 | 0 | -180 | -198

The final step is to divide the second row by its 'Y' value. To give the final matrix of;

1 | 0 | 0 | 7.9

0 | 1 | 0 | 2.867

0 | 0 | 1 | 1.1

So now we have our final matrix, how do we use this? Well taking the first row, it simply means this;

1X + 0Y + 0Z = 7.9

Which when simplified means this;

X=7.9

So from our final matrix table we can determine that;

X=7.9

Y=2.867

Z=1.1

The final thing we need to do is plug these values back into our original equations to check they are correct.

Equation one;

(2x7.9) + (3x2.867) - (4x1.1) = 20

15.8 + 8.6 - 4.4 = 20

24.4 - 4.4 = 20

This equation is correct.

Equation two;

(5x7.9) - (6x2.867) + (7x1.1) = 30

39.5 - 17.2 + 7.7 = 30

22.3 + 7.7 = 30

This equation is correct.

Equation 3;

(8x7.9) + (9x2.867) + (10x1.1) = 100

63.2 + 25.8 + 11 = 100

89 + 11 = 100

This equation is correct.

So that's how to use Gaussian Elimination to resolve three simultaneous equations.

Using the Tangible to Aid Numeracy Learning by Mathematics Blog posted

For a lot of us as adults we find the tangible a lot easier to understand and contemplate than the abstract. This is the same for children and is particularly important in the area of numeracy, which can often have a very prevalent abstract focus.

A lot of what we learn or teach in numeracy makes little, or no sense until it is something that can be seen, or touched and related to the real world. This is why the addition of tangible items to numeracy lessons can really scaffold learning.

Shapes

A highly fundamental area of numeracy which children learn early on are shapes. Using tangible models of shapes is one of the key ways in which children learn to categorise certain shapes. Items such as replicas of shapes as well as puzzles are tactile aids for children in understanding what shape is what.

Time

One of the most common areas where the use of the tangible is an essential is time. Time, even for adults and scientists is an abstract notion, so obviously for children can be very hard to understand.

The use of early learning resources is something that can really show a child what we mean when we talk about time, and also obviously aids them in telling the time. Items such as sand timers and stopwatches with their digital second screen give children a necessary grasp of what time is. Of course, the humble demonstration clock is a necessity for aiding children in understanding the concept of time telling and though elementary is essential.

Money

Money of course is another abstract concept in many ways. Trying to teach children about money and the value of coins relative to other coins is something best done in a tangible manner. Recognition of coins requires a tactile experience with replicas of the certain coin, or note. Replica money aids this learning and playing shop with this money aids the understanding of value, as well as the addition and subtraction necessary to understand how transactions work.

This aspect may also involve the use of items, such as models of fruit and vegetables and foods, which are then exchanged for money in the transaction. This is essentially a fun aspect, which can be incorporated into play.

Other items such as money snap, or games which involve shop play can decrease the level of the tangible and increase the abstract, which is something children also need to learn.

Help Children Learn Math With Coloring Games by Mathematics Blog posted

It is actually imperative that you have the correct approach to kids intellectual development. Boys and girls really like online games though don't like school from time to time. Yet, the children years are the ideal period of time to learn. And thus, it is actually a fantastic initiative to put together different games and studying. That way your son or daughter can have fun with different fascinating games and at the same time learn something new. Children often hate learning mathematics as it is extremely difficult. However fortunately there's a solution to that challenge. These days you may buy a lot of different color-by-number video games, which may be extremely effective.

You need to understand that color by number books and e-books are created for preschoolers, who've some problems with the learning process and also diligence. Lots of moms and dads have previously valued the evident pros these coloring pages offer. The key benefit of color by number printables is that these materials turn the whole process of learning in to an interactive game. This means that your daughter or son will study the ropes of math whilst enjoying various pictures.

These days color-by-number pages can be found in a variety of artistic forms. You could pick from different fairy tales characters and/or pets, autos and so on and so forth. If the son or daughter adores Winnie the Pooh, without doubts, you will find plenty of colour by number games with all the characters of this toon.

Nowadays the World Wide Web made easy looking for necessary info. And colouring books took advantage of the Internet revolution.

Thus there's no need to visit the shopping mall and find interesting color by number books for the loved little ones. Anytime it's possible to purchase different colour by number pages on the net. These color by number printables can possibly be printed later on and so serve as educational stuff for your kids. However, you can get different applications with large collections of these color by number printables. The abovementioned applications can be extremely effective because aside from leaning math features as well as enhancing diligence, your kid will get to know the basics of PC.

If you would like to have these games for your children, you need to take into consideration certain aspects. You may get these apps without any difficulties on the web. Yet, prior to getting ensure that you analyze the best deals to get applications your daughter or son will appreciate. When you are performing online research, you must ensure that the company provides you with trial version of the application so you can to consider its advantages and drawbacks.

Of course, preschool intellectual development is very important, however in many situations children just hate studies as it might be boring. At the same time using games features in studying entirely solves this common problem for children and their parents.

As stated earlier, the most common color books feature animation heroes and also pets. Children love toons and house animals, so, every single child will like appealing coloring pages that can differ in difficulty. A lot of coloring books have three to four colors as well as numbers, at the same time you may purchase more complicated ones as well (10+ hues). Using games in teaching proved to be an innovative method all over the world. Moreover, moms and dads may make use of coloring pages at home to prepare kids for school. The greatest benefit from this particular methodology is the fact that children adore it! You may even inspire your children by giving gifts and also awards for choosing the appropriate colors.

What Math eTextbooks of the Future Desperately Need by Mathematics Blog posted

Have you ever read a research paper and found a mathematical mistaken in it? Indeed I have, and perhaps you are not skilled or knowledgeable on the topic, but there are mistakes, and they do exist. Often these peer-reviewed papers do not get the adequate time necessary to hash out all the issues or find the mistakes. Further, often research papers have a lot of math in them, but they are solving the wrong problem, or attacking the problem the wrong way, and yet they publish the paper anyway.

Of course, I've also seen mistakes in college textbooks, supposedly written by the professor, and a group of grad students. Yes, it happens, and sometimes the professor points it out to the students along the way, or the correction will come about the next year. This seems unfortunate when you are paying $225 that college textbook in the first place, and so perhaps I might shed some more light on this problem, I'd like to tell you about something I recently read.


There was an interesting post on SlashDot on March 4, 2012 titled; "Math Textbooks a Textbook Example of Bad Textbooks," by Samzenpus, where the words of Keeghan were reiterated, namely that;

"There may be a reason you can't figure out some of those math problems in your son or daughter's math text and it might have nothing at all to do with you. That math homework you're trying to help your child muddle through might include problems with no possible solution. It could be that key information or steps are missing, that the problem involves a concept your child hasn't yet been introduced to, or that the math problem is structurally unsound for a host of other reasons."

Now then, in the future I suspect that math textbooks will be holographic, give it five more years and they will project holograms of the shapes, and images which you are trying to figure out. Putting things in three and four dimensions with a projected hologram makes a lot of sense. Imagine the advantages for a student who can visualize the math problem using holographic imagery. You see, in solving these problems in this way they will be using the spatial part of the brain, and not the language part of the brain were they are trying to determine what all the symbols mean.

Indeed, I bet that the students learn math better, quicker, and go on to enjoy it more, therefore do better at the subject and get better grades. Perhaps, we are just a few technologies away right now from having all the math and science engineers, scientists, and future generation of mathematical intellectual superstars graduating from our high schools and colleges. I wouldn't be surprised, and I hope that if you are involved in any of these types of technologies, that you will be thinking here, please consider it.

5th Grade Math by Mathematics Blog posted

This year my son entered the 5th grade and had a little trouble in math. Not anything that threatened him failing, but problem enough that it could affect his performance in the future if he did not get the concepts this year. I found with him that what really works is making him do problems, and do them correctly on concepts that he is having difficulty with. He's smart and understands it, he's just a boy and flies through things at warp speed so he can go play basketball with his friends.

This was the case the other day when he was struggling with fractions. I wrote down a whole bunch of practice problems and made them a little tougher than the ones I knew he would get in class. For each problem he got wrong he would do two more problems. It worked great because he wanted so desperately to not have to do more that he got them all right.


If you are a concerned parent with a 5th grader, I have included a basic curriculum of 5th grade math:

Place value and number sense-determining the value of different digits and knowing what numbers mean.

Fractions and mixed numbers-understanding fractions in the form of mixed numbers and improper fractions.

Geometry-shapes and their measurements.

Add and subtract fractions-adding and subtraction improper fractions and mixed numbers-understand.

Decimals-understanding what decimals mean.

Multiply fractions-muliplying fractions as mixed numbers and improper fractions.

Addition and subtraction-adding and subtracting large numbers.

Divide fractions-understanding how to divide fractions.

Mixed operations-add, subtract, multiply, and divide whole numbers, fractions, and decimals.

Add and subtract decimals-using decimals to add and subtract.

Algebra-elementary algebraic concepts.

Multiplication-multiplying decimal, fractions, and whole numbers.

Coordinate Graphs-understanding the basics of graphs.

Multiply decimals-decimal multiplication.

Data, charts, and graphs-understanding various displays of data.

Patterns-identifying patterns.

Division-using the division algorithm

Consumer math-math of percentages, sales, and other life applications.

Ratios, proportions, and percents-understanding ratios, proportions, and percents.

Division with decimals-understanding how to do division with decimals.

Problem solving-using various skills to calculate problems.

Measurement-identifying, converting between, and using measurements.

Number theory-prime numbers and LCM

Time-understanding units of time and using calculations with time.

Probability and statistics-calculating basic probability and statistics and making predictions.

Tuesday, 20 March

05:00

Joining the Open Source Initiative board of directors by Luis Villa » Blog Posts posted

In the past, I’ve been known to say that skeptical things about the Open Source Initiative’s role in the open source world – usually arguing that OSI was doing the basics (license approval, open source definition) respectably, but also had a lot of potential that wasn’t being taken advantage of. I’m excited to announce that I’m now putting my money where my mouth is, and joining the OSI board of directors.

“Hello, My Name is Open Source” by opensourceway, used under CC-BY-SA license

I’ll write more about my goals for OSI (and for my participation in it) in the coming months, once I’ve gotten a chance to actually meet with the rest of the board and better understand the projects that are already underway. But right now I think it’s very important to note how I became a member of the board, because I think it says something important about where OSI is going, and about why I agreed to invest my time and energy.

Specifically, at FOSDEM, OSI announced that it was beginning to shift in part to an affiliate model, where open source organizations like Mozilla, KDE, and others would have input into OSI’s processes and decisionmaking.1 One of the first tangible outcomes of that process was to ask affiliate orgs to nominate board members. The result: Mozilla nominated me, and Eclipse nominated fellow new board member Mike Milinkovich. Because of this, our election is less about us,2 and more about taking very concrete steps towards an OSI with deeper ties to the broader open source community. And that, I think, reflects what OSI has not always been, but could be – a place where the best of open source can talk and work together to move common interests forward.

  1. Ask me how your organization can join!
  2. Though obviously I expect we’ll be great :)

Saturday, 17 March

21:00

On the Importance of Per-File License Information by Luis Villa » Blog Posts posted

After the release of MPL 2, the first request for MPL 2.1 came from someone who didn’t want to put copyright headers in individual files. The issue has recently reared its head in Apache as well, and I recently was asked related questions by a GPL user as well.

The main reasons given for not using per-file headers are two-fold:

  1. They’re awkward in short files. Many programming frameworks these days (most notably rails) are encouraging creation of many short files, so this is becoming a bigger problem than it was when per-file headers were first created.
  2. They’re not considered very relevant in languages or frameworks that are library-centric, especially those with package managers that are heavily used (like ruby’s gems). Again, many modern language frameworks include tooling that encourages this approach, so some developers are thinking “why can’t I just express the license once per library?”

The case for per-file copyright headers is put well, and succinctly, by Larry Rosen:

“[O]ur goal is to pass on any important IP information that might be useful … in the place(s) [downstream licensees] are most likely to find it.”

Larry’s comment makes two assumptions that I want to flesh out and support.

First, Larry assumes that the place where people are “most likely to find” licensing information is in per-file headers. It is true that in the best case scenario in many modern languages/frameworks, library-level is a great place to put licenses – in normal use, they’ll get seen and understood. But lots of coding in the wild is not “normal use.” I review a lot of different codebases these days, and files get separated from their parent projects and directories all the time. And then you have to use fairly complex (and often expensive) tools to do what should be a simple task- figure out what the license is. So, yes, modern frameworks should in theory reduce the need for per-file licensing information – but in practice, that is often not the case.

Second, Larry assumes that you actually want people to use your code. Lots of publishers of open source code seem surprisingly unconcerned by this, unfortunately. The functional, practical benefits of open source all start with someone else reusing your code, so if you’re publishing open source code at all, you should be concerned about making it easy for people to use the code you publish. Again, putting licensing information in each file can help make this easier, by making it easier for people to figure out their rights and responsibilities. (This is particularly true if you want commercial uptake, since so many commercial users of open source are getting more conservative about using source code that is not properly labeled and licensed.)((Larry also perhaps assumes you want people to respect your license when using your code; that is a surprisingly complex topic that I will try to address some other day.))

So, yes: if you want people to find your licensing information, and  to use your code, per-file headers are the way to go. They may not be ideal but they really are worth the effort.

Friday, 03 February

03:00

The license term smorgasbord: copyleft, share-alike, reciprocal, viral, or hereditary? by Luis Villa » Blog Posts posted

I microblogged (diaspora, identica, twitter) the following statement a few weeks ago:

First new year’s resolution, 10 days late: I will use ‘hereditary license’ any time I am tempted to say ‘viral license.’

Surprisingly, this generated quite a few responses (on identica and elsewhere)- some people liked it, but many people had their own alternative to propose. So here are some longer-form thoughts.

There are four primary options that I am aware of when trying to find a one-word term for open source licenses that in some way compel distributors to also distribute code- i.e., the licenses called “copyleft” by those of us who have spent too much time with this stuff. The terms:

  • Copyleft: This is the common name when speaking to other people experienced in open source, so it’s obviously the first choice when you know your audience has at least some experience in open source. But to an audience not already involved in open source (the only time I’m ever even vaguely “tempted to say viral”), the phrase is completely non-obvious. It has zero evident meaning. In fact, it can actively confuse: it could mean the reverse of copyright, which to most people probably means “no license” or anti-copyright altogether. So it’s really not a good word to use for audiences who aren’t familiar with open source- which is to say, most audiences.
  • Viral: This is another old standby. Traditionally, the objection to this term has been that it is perjorative: no one likes viruses, so ‘viral’ is often seen as (and sometimes is) a deliberate attempt to frame copyleft licenses as inherently bad. That objection is certainly accurate, but I think there is another problem with this word: it implies that, like a virus, copyleft can spread to someone without their active involvement; you can “catch” it from the digital equivalent of being in the same room with someone, or not washing your hands. This isn’t the case – there must be a strong relationship between the copylefted code and the other code that might be required to be shared. This, to me, is where “viral” really fails to communicate. It makes people think that a copyleft is something that might “happen to them” instead of it being something that they have to be actively involved with.
  • Share-alike (or the related word “reciprocal”): Oddly, neither of these is used much outside of the Creative Commons world. Neither of these are bad terms: they are reasonably value-neutral, and they both imply that there must be an actively chosen relationship between the parties, which I think is important. But to me they don’t capture the why of the relationship; it makes it sound like there might be a choice in the matter, or something you do because you’re a nice guy.
  • Hereditary: Richard Fontana traced this back to at least 2004, so it isn’t new, but without doubt this is the least used of the various terms I’m discussing here. At least for the moment, though, and for general audiences, I’m leaning towards thinking it is the best option. First, it implies that there has to be a real, derivative relationship between the two codebases; it can’t just happen at random (like viral implies). Second, it also implies that once the relationship exists, further licensing isn’t a choice- you must pass it on to the next folks who “inherit” from you. (Share-alike/reciprocal might imply that you do this because you’re a nice guy, which isn’t the case, or that you do it back to the original sharer- which also isn’t necessarily the case.) The analogy obviously isn’t perfect, most notably because a mere redistributor who hasn’t created a derivative work that “inherits” from the parent work is still bound by the license. But I think on balance that it has the fewest tradeoffs.

So there you go, for the dozen people who asked, and the hundreds, nay billions more who don’t care :)

Wednesday, 25 January

18:00

Nominated for OpenSource.com People’s Choice Award by Luis Villa » Blog Posts posted

Based on my series of MPL posts for opensource.com, I’ve been nominated for a “people’s choice award” as a top contributor to opensource.com. It’s a nice little honor. That said, there are lots of folks on the list of nominees who have written and thought far more than I have this year- so you should go check out the list and vote for one of them instead :)

Tuesday, 03 January

21:00

Personal MPL acknowledgments by Luis Villa » Blog Posts posted

This morning I hit publish on the announcement of MPL 2.0, finishing a two year process. The official announcement had a number of acknowledgements for the many people who helped out along the way, but I wanted to take to my personal blog to add a few personal notes.

“thank you note for every language,” by woodleywonderworks, used under CC-BY 2.0.
First, Gerv Markham. Gerv has in many ways been central to Mozilla’s open source mission for a while, and it would have been easy for him to feel threatened when I parachuted in and began working on the license. Instead, he’s been helpful, patient, and constructive- everything you’d want from a co-worker and team member.

Second, Brett Smith, of the FSF: Brett has brought a very professional, constructive approach to working with me on the license. Without his dedication and patience the new GPL compatibility approach would not have succeeded. Aaron Williamson and James Vasile at SFLC and Richard Fontana at Red Hat were also instrumental in this, and again gave freely of their time when they didn’t have to. They also kept a straight face when I suggested the new approach, which probably helped a great deal in getting it done. :)

Third, Karen Copenhaver and Heather Meeker were incredible pros in helping push out the critical betas- they helped me go through the important issues and get the language right, in a way only people with decades of experience can do. That they were willing to give their time to Mozilla and to me was incredibly generous- most partners at major law firms aren’t willing to take those steps. And I’m not just saying that because Heather is now my boss. ;)

Finally, and most importantly, Mitchell Baker and Harvey Anderson: Mitchell and Harvey took a gamble when they brought me on board this project- one they didn’t need to do. This has been their baby for the past ten years, and they could have done this work themselves, or just let the license continue to age gracefully (as it was doing). Not only did they give me this terrific opportunity, they then opened up their calendars and their minds to me. As a result, I’ve had a terrific educational experience, learning the nooks and crannies of the license as well as lots about how to draft a document that stands the test of time. (Rumor has it that Mitchell wrote the original in a month, which I still find mind-boggling, and I can confirm that the text is still burned into her brain in high resolution.) It has really been an honor and a privilege for me to be involved with them and in this process, so I’m deeply thankful for their encouragement and invitation to participate.

I’ll probably write more here soon about the license and the process,  but thanking people was really at the top of my priority list.

Thursday, 29 December

21:00

A note on 2011 by Luis Villa » Blog Posts posted

The best thing I did for myself in 2011 was to get back on a bicycle after not being on one for 15+ years, and after never actually being comfortable on one. I’m not going to be racing any time soon, but I now really look forward to a bike ride as part of the average weekend and even the average vacation.

image

Yesterday was a nice punctuation mark to that, featuring a long ride down to the ocean, a great view, and a very satisfying fish and chips.

I am definitely enjoying some time out of the office and looking forward to a great 2012- hope my friends are too. Now I just need to figure out what life improvement can trump “get back on a bike.” Suggestions welcome :)

Wednesday, 14 December

19:00

at least his partners know he has a blog by the dark goddess of replevin speaks posted

brief means brief by the dark goddess of replevin speaks posted

Service Snakes by the dark goddess of replevin speaks posted

grandfathered in, or perhaps grandmothered by the dark goddess of replevin speaks posted

the gauntlet is thrown by the dark goddess of replevin speaks posted

"game of lighter fluid tag ends badly" by the dark goddess of replevin speaks posted

never heard of this one! by the dark goddess of replevin speaks posted

why i think twitter is stupid by the dark goddess of replevin speaks posted

virtual buddha machine by the dark goddess of replevin speaks posted

how does it DO that? by the dark goddess of replevin speaks posted

holding my breath by the dark goddess of replevin speaks posted

the minimalist workspace by the dark goddess of replevin speaks posted

dialectical bootstrapping by the dark goddess of replevin speaks posted

how not to use a lawyer by the dark goddess of replevin speaks posted

strange bedfellows by the dark goddess of replevin speaks posted

the real reason that dinosaurs became extinct by the dark goddess of replevin speaks posted

col. mustard, in the pantry, with a lead pipe by the dark goddess of replevin speaks posted

why i don't do numbers by the dark goddess of replevin speaks posted

if i haven't posted this before, I should have by the dark goddess of replevin speaks posted

this is sad by the dark goddess of replevin speaks posted

Monday, 19 September

22:00

San Francisco Recommended Reading by Luis Villa » Blog Posts posted

When I moved into San Francisco, I asked some folks about books I should read to get a sense of the history of the city. Here’s a sampling of the books that I’ve read since then, gathered in one place for the next time someone asks me the question. I’m still open to more suggestions, and suggestions need not be about the city as a whole- for example, my favorite book about New York was in large part about traffic and my favorite book about Boston was about the river.

Actually publishing this post, moons after writing it, is mostly in honor of today’s spectacular weather and my first ever bike ride across the Golden Gate. (And yes, the photo is cliched and I don’t care ;)

Imperial San Francisco: Urban Power, Earthly Ruin: Gray Brechin: This book opens with a slightly bizarre conspiracy theory about the role of mining in history, and keeps going with a lot of implied “the rich are trying to keep us down” without much evidence. Not that the folks he’s chronicling are particularly nice folks, but that’s easy enough to prove without going off the deep end about it. Despite this unfortunate tendency, this book has lots of great stories and background about how the San Francisco power brokers of the late 19th century interrelated with the city, the state, and the rest of the country, including some great background on the history of water and mining in the region. Recommended reading for someone trying to get a grasp on the early history of SF, albeit to be taken with a side order of salt.

Infinite City, A San Francisco Atlas, Rebeca Solnit: This is an atlas in the same way One Hundred Years of Solitude is a story about a village. Which is to say it covers so much history, in so many crazy ways, and is so unlike any other story or map you’ve ever seen, that it becomes very hard to summarize. Maybe not for everyone, either, but something I love and think is worth flipping through for anyone trying to find the stories that can bring a city to life.

Golden Gate: The Life and Times of America’s Greatest Bridge, Kevin Starr: Starr is a great historian (his more serious California history books are terrific), and this book has a lot of great stories. Unfortunately, it also has a lot of filler to make it “book length.” (In the future, books like this will be about 1/2 the length and sold purely as ebooks.) I recommend it, if you’re interested in the bridge and have time to wade through some fairly purple and extraneous prose. If you’re just looking for any one particular book about the city, this one isn’t it.

Making San Francisco American: Cultural Frontiers in the Urban West, 1846-1906, Barbara Berglund: This started as a PhD thesis, and reads like one. But if you’re the kind of person who can plunge through that (and I am), it’s a brilliant book, explaining how the racially mixed and roughly egalitarian culture of mining-era SF was gradually molded into something acceptable to “cultured” Americans – both to the nouveau riche of the West who wanted to build a city acceptable to the East, and to those from the East who were flooding into SF. Really fascinating read, and I think has some lessons applicable to the “uncultured” programmers who have to constantly resist cultural change imposed by more “refined” outsiders- still an ongoing theme in SF.

The Barbary Plague: The Black Death in Victorian San Francisco by Marilyn Chase: This book explores the history of the entry of the bubonic plague into the Americas via San Francisco. It’s a lighter and more thematically consistent book than Making San Francisco American, but covers overlapping time periods and explores some similar themes, like early anti-Chinese racism, and the relationship of early San Francisco with the Eastern US. If you’re looking for something less serious, and not at all about software, this is definitely the one book in this list to read.

Vanished Waters: A History of San Francisco’s Mission Bay, Nancy Olmsted: I live on land reclaimed from Mission Bay, so this has resonance for me that it probably won’t for others. But I think it’s a brilliant, brief book that anyone who lives near modern Caltrain should benefit from reading, since it will help you understand the geography and history of your own neighborhood.

What the Dormouse Said: How the Sixties Counterculture Shaped the Personal Computer, by John Markoff; and Regional Advantage: Culture and Competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128, AnnaLee Saxenian: I think of these as a pair, because while very different books they are also both about the culture of computing innovation and networking in the Valley. Dormouse is really very anecdotal (a little birdie once told me that even the author admits it was basically an excuse to string together a bunch of great stories he’d heard over the years), but they are great anecdotes and give a lot to chew over, especially in light of the success of the iPhone and iPad after the writing of the book, and the continued tension between personalized and centralized computing. Regional Advantage is an even older book, but critical to understanding the larger, structural causes of Silicon Valley’s success, showing that it was increased interpersonal and intercorporate sharing that made Silicon Valley continue to succeed after the shocks of the ’80s hammered both Silicon Valley and Boston’s Route 128.

Reclaiming San Francisco: Brook, Carlsson, and Peters: Not actually read yet, but am excited to find time for it. It’s a series of essays.

Monday, 22 August

19:00

Making HTML Legal Documents (Like MPL) Look Good by Luis Villa » Blog Posts posted

A few months ago I bought “Typography for Lawyers” (TFL), an excellent book that I would recommend to all lawyers. And since the biggest document I was working on at the timeis, of course, published in HTML, I started spending a few minutes here and there on learning enough CSS to make the license look better. (Understandably, the book’s very pragmatic advice is focused on Word and Pages, not HTML.)

Fine Print Fine Print by CJ Sorg, used under CC-BY 2.0

I’ve published the experiment (Compare with the plain-jane HTML MPL 1.1). This is just an experiment and a personal hack, but I’m happy to hear more suggestions and improvements, and if the final result works, I’ll suggest we use it instead of the traditional plain HTML version. Some notes on the process, including links to the (abbreviated) blog posts at the TFL website (for much more thought and detail, buy the book):

  • Fonts: This was hard. The author of Typography for Lawyers is himself a former font designer, and (correctly, I think) a font snob. Given that I was not going to splurge for fancy webfonts just for this project, I spent a lot of time browsing and playing with Google Web Fonts. This is clearly not ideal (for example, it has only one monospace option for Exhibits A and B, and I’d like a slightly more subtle serif for the titles) but I think I found a decent combination of fonts – or at least an improvement on the system fonts. Presumably, if this became Official, some better font choices could be used.
  • Small Caps: I’d never given small caps much thought until reading TFL. The book is quite positive on them under certain circumstances, and that led me to experiment and eventually to use them as headers. Unfortunately, Google Web Fonts is limited here – none of the Google Web Fonts appear to have true small caps. TFL recommends strongly against fake smallcaps, but I think these look decent so I’ve used them; I’d be happy to replace with a better one if that was available.
  • Hyphenation and Justification: TFL does not necessarily recommend full justification, but demands hyphenation if you do fully justify. Since Mozilla just added support for hyphenation, I turned on hyphenation and justification, and I think it looks good (if you’re using a recent build.) In production, it would probably be better to either use something like hyphenator that works cross-browser, or use some sort of browser feature detection to turn off justification for browsers that don’t also support hyphenation.
  • Line length: TFL recommends something between 45 and 90 characters per line. (The Supreme Court’s well-designed documents are about 65 characters per line.) Unfortunately, as best as this CSS newbie can tell, there is no good way to do this simply in CSS. I ended up with a total hack, using the “alphabet trick” described in  TFL to estimate the right width.
  • ALL CAPS: TFL IS AGAINST ALL CAPS FOR ENTIRE PARAGRAPHS. My experimental HTML version uses some gross CSS to create a highlighting box around the two traditionally all-caps blocks in the text.
  • “smart” quotes: We know that people copy and paste from the HTML version of the license into plain text files, even though (with MPL 2) we’re going to provide a very nicely formatted plain text version of the license. And of course, copying and pasting curly quotes into plain text gets… messy. And so, I am conflicted about this. The HTML linked above uses smart quotes, while the plain text uses straight quotes. Inevitably that will lead to some problems; suggestions on how best to fix (use javascript to modify what is copy-and-pasted if someone does that?) are welcome.

Of course, I’m still very bad with CSS and HTML, so I’m sure this document can be improved, and I’m happy to take suggestions and fixes. Regardless, it has been an educational experience for me and I’m glad I toyed with it.

Thursday, 23 June

19:00

Donated to the Ada Initiative by Luis Villa » Blog Posts posted

I’m excited to say that (with Krissa’s support and approval) I donated today to the Ada Initiative’s Seed 100 Campaign.

The Ada Initiative Seed 100 campaign: donate in June to support women in open technology and cultureFree and open software and culture have been very good to me, and I’m glad that the Mary and Val (and hopefully soon a fleet of others) will be working to make it more accessible to women and girls. As big a force for change as this movement has been in the past two decades, things can only improve when we consciously work on being accessible to the 50% of the population that is currently all too often excluded.

17:00

Here Comes the Fat Lady by Blakely Blog posted

After giving it some thought, I’ve decided to put the Blakely Blog to bed for good. I feel that other blogs and similar resources on the internet are doing an excellent job of keeping up with all of news and developments in this area of law and my efforts are largely duplicative. Furthermore, my schedule (which includes assisting in a soon to commence criminal trial in the SDNY) has not permitted me to spend much time working on the blog since the Booker decision.

It’s been fun, though. When I started this little endeavor I never imagined that this blog would get the attention it received. I know that the Blakely Blog was a productive endeavor from the scores of emails I received from people whose friends and family members relied on this blog, as well as others, to help sort out a complicated issue that affected them very personally.

I’d like to thank all of the people that took the time to write to me and send me opinions and news from around the country. I’d also like to thank Laurie Cohen from the Wall Street Journal who interviewed me about the Blakely Blog this summer and even mentioned me by name in the Journal.

Although I won’t be blogging any longer, I plan on submitting at least one piece of writing on the Booker case sometime this year to a legal journal. You can keep an eye out for that in the near future.

Again, thanks for reading and I wish you all the best.

Sincerely,

Jason Hernandez
jph2026@columbia.edu

CLS Sentencing Symposium - Considerations at Sentencing – What Factors are Relevant and Who Should Decide? by Blakely Blog posted

The second panel’s topic was: Considerations at Sentencing – What Factors are Relevant and Who Should Decide?

The moderator was Judge John Martin, Debevoise & Plimpton.

The panelists were:

Kyron Huigens, Professor, Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law
Kevin R. Reitz, Professor, University of Colorado School of Law
Paul H. Robinson, Professor, University of Pennsylvania Law School
Barbara Tombs, Executive Director, Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines Commission

This is by no means a complete or official report on the symposium; the Columbia Law Review will have an official report soon. All errors are my own.

Paul Robinson

Prof. Robinson began his presentation by suggesting that the question posed to the panel is misleading because it makes the assumption that there is one decision maker. In fact, there are several and they make a number of decision on several topics, such as:

Policymaking – setting goals, purposes
Rule articulation – turning general policy into articulable rules
Fact finding
Judgment making – expressing normative judgments
Determining punishment amount
Determining punishment method

Prof. Robinson used a chart (which I will post here when I get my hand on it tomorrow) that illustrates the kinds of decisions made by different decision makers (legislatures, judges, sentencing commissions, parole boards, juries, etc.)

In his opinion, the SRA got it right, but the Commission got it wrong.

Kyron Huigens

Prof. Huigens began by professing a preference for discretionary sentencing. He spent a great deal of time exploring the tension between Williams v. NY and the Court’s most recent 6th Amendment jurisprudence. That tension – known as the Blakely paradox to some (or possibly just me) – is that a judges can do what Blakely proscribes only as long as the legislature has refrained from establishing a statutory structure to guide sentencing. It seems inconsistent that judicial fact-finding is acceptable in indeterminate systems where defendant’s have little to no recourse to appeal a sentence, but impermissible when the legislature creates guidelines. He promised to explore this topic in an article he is working on.


Kevin R. Reitz

Prof. Reitz said that the states that have done the best job are the ones that have put in presumptive guidelines. That list includes Minnesota, Washington, Oregon, Kansas, North Carolina and Ohio. (There may have been others that I missed.) The best ones, he said, remove the prison release discretion from parole boards.

The states that have indeterminate systems are driving the prison population explosion.

Prof. Reitz discussed some of the problems he has with Booker and Blakely. The effect of Booker when lined up in the context of other Supreme Court decisions that have created loopholes to the Sixth Amendment is what he called “Constitutional Swiss cheese.” And there may be more holes than cheese.

The holes are all of the exceptions to the Booker rule, which are:

Williams; Booker II
Harris; McMillan
Patterson

He summarized the lay of the land as follows. The following systems have no Blakley problems: voluntary guidelines, indeterminate sentencing, mandatory minimum guidelines and mandatory minimum statutes. The following systems have Blakely problems: presumptive guidelines, presumptive statutes, mandatory guidelines.

The jurisdictions with Blakely problems have two options – Blakelyization or avoidance (change the system entirely).


Barabara Tombs

Barabara Tombs began by explaining that Minnesota’s guidelines are driven by retribution as a penal philosophy. “That’s why we put people in prison.” (Or something close to that). She said that the Commission’s work is guided by their chosen penal philosophy. It helps the Commission to focus on what our guidelines can and cannot do.

She felt that Blakely and Booker will hurt the younger sentencing commissions more than the older ones.

She discussed some statistics from Minnesota which were of interest. In Minnesota they have a 2% upward departure rate for sex offenses and murder. There are a lot of downward departures in drug cases (60% in some cases). Curiously, Minnesota has mandatory minimum drug sentences but judges can depart downward from the mandatory minimum. (I’m not sure how that works).

Finally, she (sensibly, in my view) observed that Blakely was all about jury sentencing and after the first few pages of Booker, it seems to have disappeared. Where did it go?

Judge Martin

In wrapping up the panel, Judge Martin said that he was disturbed by how much deference is being paid to reducing sentencing disparities. He feels like we have elevated that goal to too high a position.

He said that he likes the new system over the old, because it leaves guidelines and appellate review. Hopefully Congress won’t jump in too quickly, he added.

CLS Sentencing Panel – Prosecutorial Discretion and Its Challenges by Blakely Blog posted

The first panel addressed the topic of prosecutorial discretion and its changes. The moderator was CLS Professor Paul Shechtman.

The panelists were:

Martha Coakley, District Attorney, Middlesex County, MA
Michele Hirshman, First Deputy A.G., New York State
Nancy King, Professor, Vanderbilt University School of Law
Ronald F. Wright, Professor, Wake Forest University School of Law

What follows are some highlights from the panel discussion. This is by no means a complete or official report on the symposium; the Columbia Law Review will have an official report soon. All errors are my own.

This panel will explore whether prosecutorial discretion holds the keys to state sentencing, as many say does in the federal system.

Ron Wright

Prof. Wright began his comments by discussing the regulatory imbalance in sentencing. Analogizing the imbalance to other more traditional areas of regulation, he suggests that we can learn from the regulatory imbalances in sentencing.

On the topic of prosecutorial guidelines, Prof. Wright noted that some states like Kansas (and Minnesota) considered establishing prosecutorial guidelines, but in the end abandoned the effort. At least one state – Washington – has experimented with the idea of prosecutorial guidelines. These are internal guidelines, however.

Prof. Wright spent a fair amount of time talking about New Jersey, a state he described as not the hot bed of sentencing reform.

Nancy King

Whereas Prof. Wright’s focus was on macro-sentencing issues, Prof. King focused on the micro picture.

She noted that a great deal of the sentencing disparity debate has focused on racial disparities and disparity among sentencing judges. Missing from the analysis is a study of the mode of conviction. For example, sentences will vary depending on whether the defendant chose a bench trial instead of a jury trial, or went to trial at all. This is what some have called the guideline’s dirty little secret.

Prof. King is in the midst of studying data from 5 states (Pennsylvania, Maryland, Minnesota, Kansas and Washington) to study the disparities that arise based on different modes of conviction. This is a work in progress but she shared some of her preliminary results.

In Maryland and Pennsylvania she found that when the defendant chooses a jury trial, they are much more likely to be incarcerated.

(Except for cocaine offenses in Pennsylvania where bench trials are more likely to result in incarceration, but incarceration rates are lower in bench trials for simple possession).

In Washington, whether the defendant pled guilty, chose a bench trial or a jury trial, the rate of incarceration did not vary in a statistically significant manner.

In Minnesota she examined 3 offenses and found that in 5th degree drug cases, a bench trial meant the defendant was less likely to go to jail.

Prof. King also observed that in mandatory guideline states the bargain is over the charge, not the sentence, because there is no room to bargain about the sentence. Some have suggested that there needs to be a year between the top and bottom of the guideline for there to be meaningful sentence bargaining.

Michele Hirshman

Michele Hirshman has been working for the NY Attorney General’s office for the last 6 years. She immediately observed that it is important to get prosecutors to see themselves as seeking justice, not convictions.

In NY, the discretion of prosecutors is very limited. Grand jury proceeding place major restrictions on what a prosecutor can do, making it difficult to build a case. The prosecutor has to present a very big part of their case to the grand jury. Elaborate evidentiary rules that constrain how they can prove a case.

She discussed the significance of electing judges and prosecutors, arguing that this democratic check is the best way to constrain prosecutors.


Martha Coakley

Martha Coakley began her presentation by asking whether we were asking the right questions? First, we thought the problem was sentencing. We addressed that. Then we thought the problem was prosecutors. But what about the role of the defense counsel?

She suggested that better funding and treating defense work as a highly respected profession is an important way to check prosecutors.

She observed that in Massachusetts they have Rule 25(b)(2) which allows judges to reduce a charge if it’s unfair. Judges have more discretion than prosecutors. This is an important check on the prosecutor.

Finally, she argued that all crimes are not created equal. In child abuse cases the ability to intervene early is of utmost importance. Someone who abuses kids needs a different sentence and rehabilitative program than a bank robber.

We spend too much money on putting people in jail and focusing on sentencing guidelines.

CLS Sentencing Symposium - Judge Lynch's Opening Remarks by Blakely Blog posted

This post is coming to you live from Columbia Law School’s state sentencing symposium. The symposium was kicked off with some opening remarks by Judge and CLS Professor Gerard Lynch. What follows are some highlights of his opening remarks.

Judge Lynch began his comments by noting the impeccable timing of the symposium. The timing, however, was fortuitous – the symposium was not planned as a response to Blakely or Booker. The original purpose of this symposium was to steer the sentencing conversation away from Congress and the Sentencing Commission, and towards the courts.

Sentencing is still a topic that is not given a lot of attention in criminal courses. Legal and academic writing tends to focus of Congress, although federal sentencing only composes 7% of the incarcerated public. This is especially significant given that the focus of federal law (white collar crime, immigration and drug crimes) is distinct from the traditional street crimes that most people are concerned about.

Although there is no clear pattern or trajectory in sentencing law, the states have been the true innovators in sentencing.

State Sentencing Symposium at Columbia Law School by Blakely Blog posted

The symposium starts tomorrow at 1:30pm with Judge Lynch's opening remarks. The event is open to the public and free of charge.

For more details go here.

I'll be in attendance and blogging from the symposium.

Tuesday Morning News by Blakely Blog posted

Law.com has an interesting backstory to Justice Breyer's ethical quandary regarding the Booker case. Can one of the guidelines' architects decide their fate? Apparently, it not only matters what you ask, but who you ask. As you may recall, the bloggers spotted this issue well before the press. In this post from August, I discussed Justice Breyer's possible recusal, with a little help from the blogging community.

The Monitor has a good article discussing Booker's impact on different types of crimes. The article argues that Booker will affect white collar crime and drug crimes more than any other class of crimes, whereas more "serious" crimes will not be disturbed.

Tulsa World has an interesting article that is a few days old entitled, "Judge sticking with sentencing guidelines." Unfortunately, you have to be a subscriber to access the article. But, I did manage to find this little blurb:

U.S. Chief District Judge Sven Erik Holmes is a believer in guideline sentencing, and he intends to keep using the existing federal guidelines even though the U.S. Supreme Court said Wednesday that they are no longer mandatory.

Chief Judge Holmes issued a Blakely Blockbuster opinion in August in US v. O'Daniel. In that decision, he laid out a 4 point plan for bringing the guidelines into compliance with Blakely.

Interesting, It's-A-Small-World News: Alexandra Shapiro, the primary author of the New York Council of Defense Lawyers amicus brief, and a partner at Latham & Watkins NY, is co-teaching a Seminar in Federal Criminal Practice at Columbia Law School this semester. The course, which I am enrolled in, is also taught by Jonathan Bach, a partner at Kronish Lieb Weiner & Hellman LLP.

Sentencing is, of course, a big part of the seminar due to Blakely and Booker.

Morning News Stories by Blakely Blog posted

Findlaw.com columnist Mark Allenbaugh writes, "The Supreme Court's New Blockbuster U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Decision: A Clear Sixth Amendment Ruling, with an Invitation to Congress to Create a Better Remedy."

Salon.com cleverly pokes, "Supreme Court to Congress: Here's what you really meant." Salon asked the current chair of the American Bar Association's committee on sentencing, Jim Felman, a practicing defense attorney in Tampa, Fla., to shed some light on the surprising Supreme Court news.

The Washington Post editorializes, "The Court on Sentencing."

Oregonians will find the following article interesting, "A better way to set prison time - Hit to federal sentencing laws is a reminder to Oregon that the state also must update its court practices."

More News Stories by Blakely Blog posted

I have some coherent commentary planned for tomorrow. Until then, here are a few more news stories of note.

Supreme Court generates more sentencing turmoil,” from The Columbian:

Stephen Kanter, a professor at Lewis & Clark's Northwestern School of Law, said many sentences may be reconfirmed, with judges saying they would have given the same sentence even if they hadn't been bound by guidelines.


U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Made Advisory by Court,” from Bloomberg:

``It probably will create additional leverage for defense counsel in negotiating agreements,'' said B. Todd Jones, a former U.S. attorney in Minnesota. ``They know they have two bites at the apple now'' -- with prosecutors and judges.

Lots and Lots of News Stories by Blakely Blog posted

Here is a collection of recent news stories on yesterday's opinions by the Court. Where relevant, I've excerpted interesting parts from the stories.

"High court loosens criminal sentencing guidelines," from the Seattle Times:

Gregory Poe, a Washington, D.C., attorney and former federal defender, said, "Congress is likely to make changes. And there is great concern that Congress may have an appetite to create a system applying strict penalties regardless of the merits in individual cases."

...

Frank Bowman, a professor at the Indiana University School of Law and a leading expert on the guidelines, said, "There is one thing that appears to be clear: The court has, by either judicial fiat or an act of statutory interpretation, created a system of advisory guidelines which, I think you can at least argue, give federal trial judges the greatest sentencing power they've ever had."

Assistant Attorney General Christopher Wray said the Justice Department was "disappointed" that the court had made the guidelines advisory in nature, but emphasized that the opinion makes clear that trial judges still are required to consult the guidelines in making sentencing decisions.


"Area well poised in wake of Supreme Court sentencing decision," from the Waco Tribune:

Federal inmates at the McLennan County Detention Center in downtown Waco raised the roof for joy Wednesday morning after learning on television news that the U.S. Supreme Court had upended federal sentencing guidelines.

Most inmates there have yet to be sentenced and are waiting to go to court, said Thomas Medart, chief of security at the privately run facility.

"They're happy," he said. "It's postponed some of the sentencing that would have happened, but it's not creating any problems for us."


...

U.S. District Judge Walter S. Smith Jr., who presides over Waco's federal court and is chief judge for the Western District of Texas, said he wasn't surprised by the ruling. After all, Smith issued a ruling of his own in July saying the sentencing guidelines were not constitutional and violated defendants' Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial.

Smith said he was pleased with the decision because it will give federal judges more discretion in sentencing. He said


...

Whatever the fallout, Smith said he doesn't believe Wednesday's ruling will be the last word on the subject, an observation echoed on the Supreme Court. Congress will likely set higher mandatory minimums for many crimes, again taking away judges' discretion, he said.

Johnny Sutton, U.S. attorney for the Western District of Texas, said he needs more time to digest the high court's ruling. But it doesn't appear "the sky is falling," he said.


"Sentencing guidelines tossed out," from The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette:

Calling yesterday's decision a "mess," Ohio State University law professor Douglas Berman said: "This is going to be applied in diverse and dramatically different ways in the lower courts."

For students of the Supreme Court's internal politics, the split decision yesterday reflected the influence of Breyer, who worked on sentencing reform as the Senate Judiciary Committee's chief counsel in 1979 and 1980 and served on the Sentencing Commission from 1985 to 1989. "This is Breyer's revenge," said Berman. "He loves the world he created and wants to hold onto it any way he can."


...

Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., who as the Judiciary Committee chairman would preside over any rewriting of sentencing law, reacted cautiously to yesterday's ruling. "I intend to thoroughly review the Supreme Court's decision and work to establish a sentencing method that will be appropriately tough on career criminals, fair and consistent with constitutional requirements," he said.

"Judges Freed From Sentencing Rules," from the LA Times:

By basically preserving the current system, the ruling is not likely to have a broad effect on criminals serving federal terms or those awaiting sentence. It is unclear what effect it will have on future sentencing.

"There are going to be a lot of disappointed criminals in federal prison today," said Kent Scheidegger of the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation, an organization in Sacramento that supports the rights of crime victims.



Some other stories include: "Sentencing ruling may aid Cianci's early release," from the Providence Journal; "Justices weaken sentencing rules," from the Philadelphia Inquirer;"Federal sentencing system to get overhaul," from the Knoxville News Sentinel.

Late Nite Thoughts by Blakely Blog posted

I’ve put together some of my initial reactions to today’s decision in Booker and Fanfan. The decision is a whopping 124 pages and there’s a lot to discuss, of course. These are just preliminary thoughts that I hope to refine and pick-up in the next several months.

The first opinion, written by Stevens, addresses the first question: does Blakely apply to the guidelines? The answer is yes. Although there is plenty to talk about here, the real action is in the second opinion, authored by Breyer.

Two meta-observations. First, the tone of both opinions is rather matter-of-fact when compared to Blakely. Of course, Scalia is not exactly the kumbaya type, but I get the feeling that the bitter fight over the guidelines was waged in Blakely, not in Booker and Fanfan. Second, the Booker and Fanfan opinions don’t cite to academic commentary, whereas Blakely cited to academics on the issue of prosecutorial discretion and pleas. In the remedy opinion, the Court makes several assertions regarding alternative remedies that could have been more fully explored if they had cited to scholarly work.

Now, I’ll turn to a few topics that stuck out to me.

Elements, Statutory Construction and the 6th Amendment

The Court’s first citation is to In re Winship. To my surprise, the Court then discusses Jones at length. Jones was a statutory construction case where the Court was called upon to decide whether Congress intended to create 3 separate car jacking offenses, or whether the statute identified sentencing factors. Although Jones (and Castillo and Almendarez-Torres) are relevant, they do not pose 6th Amendment questions. These cases presume the answer to the question before the Court. We know that the government must prove all elements of an offense to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. It’s unclear how this line of cases helps us understand how we should treat a leadership enhancement (which is not an element of any offense) in light of the 6th Amendment.

But here’s the tougher question: is drug quantity an element of the offense after Booker and Fanfan? The opinion suggests that they are not, but that they may have to be treated as elements. Judge Easterbrook’s dissent in Booker said that the majority’s conception of drug quantity under Blakely was nothing more than Apprendi. Ok. Where do we stand now?

(I recognize that my thoughts on this are inchoate, but it’s late and I’m still just thinking out loud.)

What’s good law now?

The majority opinion authored by Stevens was forced to confront the viability of several cases now that Blakely applies to the guidelines. Here’s a quick run-down of what the Court said: Dunnigan survives. Witte and Watts are inapposite because they did not present 6th Amendment questions. Edwards and Mistretta are not inconsistent with the Booker ruling.

I find it hard to believe that none of these cases were overruled, or at least recognized as being in tension with the ruling. One gets the feeling that Stevens is distinguishing these cases on very narrow grounds that may not survive closer scrutiny.

Retroactivity, Prior Convictions and Mandatory Minimums

Unfortunately, the Court didn’t say much (if anything) about retroactivity, prior convictions (Almendarez-Torres) or mandatory minimums, and fact finding that leads to the imposition of mandatory minimum sentences (Harris).
This isn’t surprising, I guess, given that the cases didn’t present any of these issues. My guess would be that the Court will now grant cert on a case to handle the retroactivity question, which is the most pressing of these three topics. The Court’s adherence and praise of the Apprendi/Ring line of cases suggests that Booker and Fanfan won’t be retroactive.

What Would Congress Do? (WWCD?)

Debates will surely rage over the majority’s take on what Congress would have preferred if faced with the limitations imposed by Booker and Fanfan.

I’ll just make a brief point here and return to the topic at a later date. The Court appears to interchangeably apply two standards here: what would Congress have intended and what will make the smallest fuss. The second standard appears to play a prominent role and I’m not convinced that that’s the right standard. I am also a bit skeptical of the Court’s zealous protection of judicial factfinding. Of course “court” meant “judge” in 1987. All we knew was judicial fact finding. I’m not convinced that this legislative preference should trump the newly invigorated 6th Amendment. Instead, we’ve been given a “soft” 6th Amendment jury trial right. This portion of the remedy opinion seems out of sync (“old school,” if you will) with the new, hip, “not your found fathers” 6th Amendment that Stevens “updates” for us.

Advisory Guidelines, Relevant Conduct and Uniformity

In the second opinion, the Court justifies its choice of advisory guidelines over a jury fact-finding regime, in part, on the need to ensure uniformity by adherence to the offender’s real conduct, as expressed by relevant conduct. The argument here is that if judges can’t take relevant conduct into consideration, there will be an unbearable sentencing disparity that the SRA was supposed to eradicate.

This argument, in my view, relies on some questionable assumptions about the ability of a jury fact-finding regime to properly “account” for relevant conduct. But even assuming that jury fact-finding could not account for relevant conduct, I’m not sure that the sentencing disparity that the majority is talking about here is the kind of disparity that gave birth to the guidelines. Base level offenses would remain unaffected by a jury fact finding system. The defendant would have to answer for any discoverable relevant conduct that makes it into the indictment. Just how much of a disparity are we facing here?

Not to mention that there are competing sentencing goals that are recognized by the SRA that would counsel against rigid adherence to a real offense system. The Court’s discussion of relevant conduct cast in light of uniformity concerns glosses over the fundamental incompatibility of Blakely and relevant conduct, in my view.

Guidelines Suffer Technical Knockout - May Live To See Another Day by Blakely Blog posted

Here's some old news - the Supreme Court ruled today that Blakely applies to the guidelines. The remedy appears to be making the guidelines advisory, subject to appeal based on a "reasonableness" standard.

I just got my first look at the opinion(s), which you can access here. I reserve the right to correct my characterization if I made a mistake.

More to follow later tonight...

5 hours and counting? by Blakely Blog posted

Well, in 5 hours I'll be on a plane to Ft. Lauderdale. The Supreme Court will announce any new decisions tomorrow at 10 am. So my prediction, based solely on my travel schedule, is that Booker and Fanfan will be decided tomorrow, as my plane takes off.

Details to follow, if I'm right, after I land in FLL.

No Decision Today by Blakely Blog posted

Still no decision. The next possible day for a decision is tomorrow. That and you might even get that pony you wanted for your birthday.

More Exciting News About the Columbia Sentencing Symposium by Blakely Blog posted

I've just been made aware of some exciting additions to the upcoming Columbia Law Review symposium on state sentencing entitled, Sentencing: What's at Stake for the States?

The symposium will be held on the campus of Columbia Law School this January 21 and 22. And we might even have a Booker and Fanfan decision by then! Imagine that.

I've pasted the text of a recent press release announcing the event and some recent additions.


Judge William Pryor Headlines Symposium on State Sentencing Guidelines

Eleventh Circuit Judge William H. Pryor, Jr. Highlights List of Judges, Academics, and Practitioners Coming to New York to Debate the Merits of Various Sentencing Regimes

New York, NY --- The Columbia Law Review announced Thursday that it will be hosting a symposium entitled Sentencing: What's at Stake for the States? this January 21 and 22 on the campus of Columbia Law School in New York City. The symposium, centered primarily on state criminal sentencing regimes, will feature more than twenty of the most interesting and thoughtful voices in sentencing scholarship and practice.

The Supreme Court's decision last term in Blakely v. Washington will very likely lead a number of states to revise their sentencing guidelines, even if only to quell uncertainty as to the case's applicability. This symposium seeks to contribute to these endeavors by providing a forum for candid and lively discussions of the practical and theoretical implications of various sentencing systems and reforms. To that end, it will address a broad range of topics, including the institutional concerns inherent in guideline systems and the competing or complimentary policies underlying different sentencing frameworks.

The keynote address will be delivered by Judge William H. Pryor, Jr., of the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Throughout his career, Judge Pryor has been an outspoken advocate of sentencing reform. As Attorney General of Alabama, he led the creation of that state's Sentencing Commission, which he saw as a means to achieve "truth in sentencing," eliminate unjust disparities, and relieve a serious prison overcrowding problem and budgetary crisis. He also has championed the use of alternatives to incarceration for first-time nonviolent offenders, such as work and restitution penalties, and counseling for drug offenders.

In addition to Judge Pryor, the symposium will feature professors Rachel Barkow (NYU), Frank Bowman (Indiana), Antony Duff (Stirling), Richard Frase (Minnesota), Kyron Huigens (Cardozo), Nancy King (Vanderbilt), James Liebman (Columbia), Marc Miller (Emory), Kevin Reitz(Colorado), Paul Robinson (Penn), Kate Stith (Yale), Paul Shechtman (Columbia), Michael Tonry(Cambridge), Ron Wright (Wake Forest), and Franklin Zimring (Boalt Hall); Middlesex County(MA) D.A. Martha Coakley; Michele Hirshman of the N.Y. Attorney General's Office; Roxanne Lieb of the Washington State Institute for Public Policy; Barbara Tombs of the MN Sentencing Guidelines Commission; and Judges Gerard Lynch and John Martin, Jr. (retired).

The symposium will begin midday Friday, January 21, highlighted by Judge Pryor's address at 5:30 p.m., and end Saturday, January 22. It will be open to the public and free of charge. For a complete listing of the participants, panel topics, and event times, please visit http://www.columbialawreview.org/symposium/.

I've run out of clever blog posts to communicate that we still don't have a Booker and Fanfan decision by Blakely Blog posted

At least that appears to be the case, based on reports from the SCOTUS blog. This means we have to wait until the new year for a decision. Jan. 11th is the next possible date for an opinion. Wow.

Still No Decision from the SCOTUS by Blakely Blog posted

The next likely dates for an opinion are December 7, 8 and 13th.

State Sentencing Symposium at Columbia Law School by Blakely Blog posted

I've just received word that the Columbia Law Review has posted an online announcement of an upcoming sentencing symposium which will focus on state sentencing. The symposium will take place at Columbia Law School on January 21st and 22nd.

The symposium will feature some fantastic panels. Here's what the web site is reporting:

Panel 1: Prosecutorial Discretion and Its Challenges
Michele Hirshman, First Deputy A.G., New York State
Nancy King, Professor, Vanderbilt University School of Law
Ron Wright, Professor, Wake Forest University School of Law

Panel 2: Considerations at Sentencing – What Factors are Relevant and Who Should Decide?
Kyron Huigens, Professor, Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law
Kevin Reitz, Professor, University of Colorado School of Law
Paul Robinson, Professor, University of Pennsylvania Law School

Panel 3: Theories & Policies Underlying Guideline Systems
Antony Duff, Professor, University of Stirling
Richard Frase, Professor, University of Minnesota Law School
Roxanne Lieb, Director, Washington State Institute for Public Policy
Michael Tonry, Professor, University of Minnesota Law School

Panel 4: The Institutional Concerns Inherent in Sentencing Regimes
Rachel Barkow, Assistant Professor, New York University School of Law
Frank Bowman, Professor, Indiana University School of Law
Marc Miller, Professor, Emory School of Law
Frank Zimring, Professor, University of California at Berkeley School of Law

For more information, check out the CLR web site dedicated to the symposium here.

Gone Fishin' by Blakely Blog posted

This post makes official what is obvious to readers of this blog - I am on a Blakely break of sorts until the Court decides Booker and Fanfan. The demands of Federal Courts, Mass Torts, Trial Practice and Tort Reform Research require my attention while the Supremes trade drafts back and forth.

But once they decide, I'll be back to my old form, blogging virtually 24/7. I've been doing a lot of sentencing reading the last month and I hope that this will help to make my post-Blakely commentary all the more insightful.

Hey, just think. I might be back on the horse on Monday. It could happen.

Blakely and Consecutive Sentences in New York by Blakely Blog posted

Unfortunately, I've been away from the blog for quite some time. My mind has been at ease, however, because I know you are all in good hands as long as Sentencing Law and Policy is out there. Let's face it, in the world of Blakely blogs, Sentencing Law and Policy is the New York Times of blogs, whereas the Blakely Blog has more of a New York Post feel. That's ok, I like it that way.

One of the things that has kept me busy is a pro bono project that I have started as part of Columbia's pro bono program. What am I working on? A Blakely project, of course. I get many emails and letters from prisoners and their family members asking for my help on various Blakely appeals. Unfortunately, I have to turn all of those requests down because I'm not an attorney. Right now, I'm just a guy with a lot of debt and a blog. I've taken-on this pro bono project, which is supervised by a real live attorney, as a way to give back to the community.

Here's what I'm working on, and if anyone out there can offer some help, I'd be very appreciative (especially from jurisdictions outside of NY). This case only concerns New York state law, there are no federal charges. The client was indicted for and found guilty of, among other things, manslaughter in the first degree (NY Penal Law § 125.20 (1)) and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree (NY Penal Law § 265.03). The indictment did not allege against whom the defendant intended to use the weapon for purposes of the possession charge, which is a distinct crime from manslaughter and relevant for purposes of sentencing. The judge, however, sentenced the defendant for manslaughter and criminal possession of a weapon.

Here's where the specifics of New York state law come in.

The judge imposed consecutive sentences on the defendant despite N.Y. Penal Law § 70.25(2) which states:


When more than one sentence of imprisonment is imposed on a person for two or more offenses committed through a single act or omission, or through an act or omission which in itself constituted one of the offenses and also was a material element of the other, the sentences, except if one or more of such sentences is for a violation of section 270.20 of this chapter, must run concurrently.

This relevant because if the indictment alleged that the defendant intened to use the weapon which he criminally possessed against the same person who he was charged with manslaughter, § 70.25(2) would likely bar a consecutive sentence.

The question here appears to be: could the judge independently find that that the defendant possessed the weapon with the intent of using against someone not in the indictment for the purposes of sentencing him to a consecutive sentence? Prior to the Blakely ruling, the state argued that the sentence did not go beyond the statutory maximum. That Apprendi-based understanding of the law is clearly undercut by Blakely, but the Blakely issue here is not as clear cut as it is in a number of cases. Was the indictment not sufficient enough to comply with Blakely?

Assuming that Blakely doesn't apply, there is an argument that criminal possession of a weapon is an offense that should be sentenced concurrently with manslaughter under § 70.25(2). My question here is, does the Blakely ruling's like obliteration (maybe "obliterate" is a strong word) of the sentencing factor/element distinction undermine NY precedent which states that possession of a weapon distinct for § 70.25(2) purposes from manslaughter?

I know that there have been challenges in California to the state's consecutive sentences law. Those cases may be inapposite because the defendant in this case is not challenging the constitutionality of § 70.25(2). He is only challenging the judicial finding of fact not included in the indictment. On the other hand, I would still like to hear from anyone who has any thoughts or experience in mounting challenges to consecutive sentencing statutes from all jurisdictions, including California.

I would appreciate it if any one out there was willing to discuss the concurrent/consecutive sentencing aspect of this case, or offer any other suggestions for research outside of New York.

Update: I've added some detail and taken some things out of this post since I first put it up.


"Restitution Proceedings In Federal Sentencing" - An Online Seminar by Blakely Blog posted

On Wednesday, October 20 (9:00 a.m. PST) and Friday, October 22 (12:00 Noon PST), AFDA will conduct an online seminar entitled, "Restitution Proceedings In Federal Sentencing."

The program will run approximately 45 minutes to one hour. It will be held in the ONLINE SEMINARS section of the AFDA web site, which operates like a chat room but with moderator controls. The presentation format will be audio accompanied by the sequential placement of slides in the chat room screen, similar to a powerpoint presentation.

The program will present a five-step analysis in handling restitution determinations. As courts have recognized that restitution is a statutory obligation and thus not based specifically on the sentencing guidelines, this topic remains relevant in our handling of fraud / theft during this remarkable period of uncertainty surrounding the guidelines, as we await the Supreme Court's ruling in Booker / Fanfan.

For more details, please visit the AFDA web site.

Oral Argument Transcripts from Booker and Fanfan by Blakely Blog posted

You can access a transcript of the oral argument here.

California Dreamin' and Some Thoughts About Monday's Argument at the Court by Blakely Blog posted

After spending over an hour on the A train on my way to JFK and five and a half hours in the middle seat of row 32 aboard Delta flight 462, I’ve finally made to the beautiful campus of Stanford Law School. I’m anxiously awaiting the start of what promises to be two great days of discussion and learning. Although this blog represents the bulk of my thinking on Blakely, I hope that as a result of the Stanford conference, I will be able to produce a more serious and scholarly look at Blakely for publication in a law journal. In particular, I am very interested in exploring the historical role of the jury and the Blakely majority’s use of history to justify the majority opinion.

All of that will have to wait a little longer. The conference does not start until the afternoon, so I’m taking some time this morning to offer some of my thoughts on Monday’s argument in Booker and Fanfan.

My Prediction for Question One

As Tom Goldstein, the consummate Court insider, has reported, the word is that the Blakely majority will hold (see this post, and the surrounding posts as well). Based solely on my observation of the argument, I think that the Court will split 6-3 with respect to Question One, with Justice Kennedy joining the Blakely majority. As you may recall, I set the line at 1.5 Justices for the Booker/Fanfan argument, so I guess I think that the respondents will “cover.” (Remember, this is for novelty purposes only.).

Here’s why I think the break-down will be 6-3. First, I’m assuming that the Blakely majority will hold. There were some reports that Justice Ginsburg might defect from the Blakely majority but based on her questions on Monday, I don’t think she’s likely to defect. Plus, others are reporting that she’s sticking with the majority. I guess I just think that’s right.

Second, I can’t see O’Connor or Breyer, after their dissents in Blakely, making a 180 degree turn. These two Justices were the most active questioners of the respondents (especially Breyer), and I don’t think they will change their position. They put too much into being the voice of the dissent in Blakely, in my opinion. The Chief is hard to peg, but my guess is that he will join Breyer and O’Connor in dissent.

Finally, that leaves Justice Kennedy. Remember, Kennedy is no fan of the guidelines. In fact, he dislikes the guidelines so much that he has a report which bears his name that attacks the guidelines. Despite those feelings, he dissented in Blakely, but the handwriting is on the wall with respect to Booker and Fanfan. Why not join the majority? In my notes, I have Justice Kennedy asking only two questions to Acting SG Paul Clement, both on the topic of what constitutes a “Blakely fact.” He asked the SG if there were any facts which could still be found by the judge under Blakely. He used determining the defendant’s remorse as an example. Doug Berman has picked up on this line of questioning, suggesting that the Court start working through a distinction between “offense facts” and “offender facts.” Although I don’t think that Justice Kennedy will be able to convince the majority to endorse his bright-line, I take his questions to those of a Justice considering joining the majority. Furthermore, I think the respondents may have convinced Justice Kennedy that the "collaborative process" or "dialogue" between the branches which he extols in his dissent may have died in recent years.

I know this amounts to nothing more than a hunch, but I’ll stick to it. (By the way, if you haven’t read the Vanity Fair piece about Bush v. Gore, where former clerks on the Court at that time spill some of the beans, you should certainly get a copy. But be warned, there are some harsh words about Justice Kennedy in there and a choice quote from Scalia reminiscing about his days in Brooklyn.).

On the other hand, Justice Kennedy did ask the respondents what can be viewed as some hostile questions. He pressed them on why a standardless discretionary system is preferable to the guidelines; he asked what policy or principle dictated the respondent’s conclusions; and he asked some pragmatic questions regarding factfinding by correctional authorities, as opposed to judges. In a way, these questions are not hostile if Justice Kennedy’s fears of a standardless sentencing regime are allayed by the Court’s answer to question two. If the Court endorses an advisory guideline system, with meaningful appellate review, I think Justice Kennedy’s fears are put to rest and he joins the majority.

Assuming my prediction is right, I wonder if lower courts will be left to pickup where Justice Kennedy left off in the oral argument. Perhaps they will be the ones to propose the line, if there is one at all. As I mentioned at the beginning of this intolerably long post, I’d be interested to see how Justice Kennedy’s line fits with the judge’s and the jury’s historic role.

Question Two – Who the heck knows?

Trying to figure out what the Court will say with respect to question two is likely an exercise in futility. There are simply too many possibilities and permutations which make predicting how 5 members of the Court will vote very difficult. I do, however, think that based on the questions asked by Justice Breyer and O’Connor, which I think focused more on the remedy than the first question (the transcript will prove me right or wrong on that), that these two Justices will try very hard to agree on an answer to the severance question. My inclination here is that Breyer and O’Connor are thinking, “Well, the guidelines are going down and there’s nothing we can do about it. We might as well do what we can to help forge a consensus with respect to the second question. After all, or dissents in Blakely were so pragmatic, we might as well be pragmatic here and do what we can to limit the chaos.”

I could do a little more speculating on question two, but instead I’d like to raise a point which has been haunting me since the oral argument. At one point during the argument, one of the Justices quipped that their opinion on the second question will have limited relevance because Congress will inevitably, and likely quickly, act to repair the guidelines after the case is decided. There are reports circulating that Congress is contemplating a slue of mandatory minimum sentences should the Court invalidate the guidelines. Should that come to pass, I can’t envision who the winners would be.

Only a temporary pause by Blakely Blog posted

I've been offline for a few days, but I will soon return to the blog. I've been busy arguing before the Senate, the Columbia Law School Senate, that is; researching for a professor (non-sentencing related); and reading for class (not so much on the last one).

I'm about 2 minutes, I'll be on my way to JFK where my ultimate destination will be Stanford Law School and the upcoming Sentencing Conference.

More blogging to come...

Late night wrap-up by Blakely Blog posted

First, let me say that I apologize for the errors in the posts by Dave Ziff (which have been corrected). Those errors are my own, not Dave’s and are attributable to my hurried attempt to get news out on the blog. In particular, I offer my apologies to Chris, who is a fellow blogger at TalkLeft and a supporter of this blog.

I’d also like to thank Dave Ziff for taking the time to transcribe my ramblings into something coherent for readers of the blog. Thanks Dave!

Dave’s posts offer a rather broad sketch of the argument. Most of the major threads of discussion and questioning are covered by Dave’s posts, but there are many fine points which were not captured. I hope to raise those finer points over the next few days.

A few other blogs are covering the Blakely argument, notably Doug Berman on Sentencing Law and Policy (who I met in person for the first time, despite our many email exchanges), Tom Goldstein covers the argument with some insider information at the SCOTUS blog and Howard Bashman has coverage of the argument on How Appealing.

Prof. Berman’s first post offers some thoughts on the SG’s arguments on Blakely’s applicability.

Prof. Berman has rounded up the media coverage on his site, too.

I’m going to reserve further commentary until tomorrow (which is now today). What a day! Stay tuned.

Friday, 13 May

21:00

Regular internet detox tips? by Luis Villa » Blog Posts posted

Over the past few years I’ve heard a few friends talk about plans to get off the internet for one day a weekend, one weekend a month, etc. Each of the past two years I’ve tried to take 3-4 days off the internet, and both times it has been rejuvenating- I come back feeling pretty invigorated, focused, etc. But that feeling didn’t last too long last year and I doubt it will this year.

Small waterfall on the side of a trail off Skyline Drive, Virginia, May 2011

 

 

So … do any friends who have tried similar things have tips or thoughts on how to do an internet detox on a more regular basis and actually make it both effective and sustainable? I imagine that the “make it sustainable” part inevitably involves advice on how to handle email, work, twitter, etc. while you’re gone. Twitter and greader I’m actually pretty good with just “mark it read and move on” but that’s much harder with email for me.

Friday, 17 September

13:00

The waiting is the hardest part by Blakely Blog posted

No Booker/Fanfan decision today. Next possible opinion date: Dec. 13th.

by Half the Sins of Mankind posted

Is Charles Krauthammer Truly Or Only Pretending to Be Thick As Two Short Planks? He concludes a rant against the White House's feud with Fox News (which is foolish of the Obama Administration, undeniably) with this: Defend Fox from the likes of Anita Dunn? She's been attacked for extolling Mao's political philosophy in a speech at a high school graduation. But the critics miss the surpassing

by Half the Sins of Mankind posted

Medal of Honor to James Earl Ray While any transcript produced by Rush Limbaugh himself is suspect, I do think Jack Huberman may have been in error in his claim that Limbaugh at one point said, "You know who deserves a posthumous Medal of Honor? James Earl Ray. We miss you, James. Godspeed."The only person I can find who actually has said that James Earl Ray deserved the Congressional Medal of

by Half the Sins of Mankind posted

Slate Shake Although I find the demands for bridal virginity as appalling as Timothy Noah does, he's nonetheless being willfully stupid about why artificial hymens are considered a threat to conservative Muslim values. Pause for a moment to consider what these men are asking God to protect them from: a cheap, mass-produced insert that releases fake blood. It's the technical equivalent of a

by Half the Sins of Mankind posted

Amazon Oops Evidently there was some confusion about which "Sarah Palin in a partly-unzipped fleece against a blue sky with fleecy clouds" picture to use for the book cover.The one Harper-Collins picked is much more flattering, though it omits Palin's signature can-do up-do in favor of the softer style preferred by the GOP image consultants.

by Half the Sins of Mankind posted

Resolution: No More Betting I picked up a bad habit from my husband, which is to challenge people who are convinced they are right about something that is empirically provable (either now or in the future) to a bet. The habit is a bad one for many reasons, and on a practical level it hasn't always worked out even for my husband, as he's soon due to pay up on a bet he made with one of my friends

by Half the Sins of Mankind posted

You Pick Them Cherries, Girl A summer intern at the Wall Street Journal produced a fawning interview with Gov. Rick "Goodhair" Perry about how totally awesome Texas is, especially compared to California. It's all about as silly as you would expect from the above description, with some extra win in Gov. Perry's admiration for the elderly's opposition to government insurance, because "They like

by Half the Sins of Mankind posted

Countless Screaming Argonauts Christopher Beam trots out the standard "it's economically irrational to vote" argument on behalf of Meg Whitman, who currently seeks to be the Republican candidate for California's next gubernatorial election despite not having registered to vote until 2002. She's apparently been eligible since 1978, which makes the non-standard, Whitman-specific part of Beam's

by Half the Sins of Mankind posted

Gateway =/= Tunnel While Steve Chapman is right to call out the government on its sloppy use of statistics with regard to teen smoking, I don't think he makes a definitive case against the FDA's ban on non-menthol flavors in cigarettes. The question is not what teen smokers are smoking once the habit is established, but rather what they smoked when they first began smoking. I'm among the

by Half the Sins of Mankind posted

Is "Bill Wilson" a Name Associated with Jewish People? I am a little puzzled over the latest rightwing-generated dust-up, which is Americans for Limited Government's claim after ALG sent a mass e-mail under the name of its president, Bill Wilson, an NBC "Dateline" producer responded with "Bite Me, Jew Boy!"So far as I can tell from Googling, Mr. Wilson is not Jewish, and so the reply seems a

by Half the Sins of Mankind posted

What do the House and Senate health care reform bills say about an individual mandate? The WSJ has been running arguments about why health care reform legislation is unconstitutional if it includes an "individual mandate," on the premise that there's no commerce here that Congress would be regulating, and therefore it goes beyond even the broad reading of the Commerce Clause ("The Congress shall

by Half the Sins of Mankind posted

More Depressing Than the Birthers I'm glad I'm leaving the country for a few days, because the debate over the health care bill is really starting to get to me. I simultaneously can't seem to resist reading the news reports about all the stupid things people say and believe, that are blocking out the worthwhile questions about whether HR 3200 (the bill sponsored by Rep. Dingell that has passed

by Half the Sins of Mankind posted

We All Lived Through the 1990s, Right? I'm sort of puzzled by Virginia Democrats' excitement over publicizing Republican gubernatorial candidate Robert F. McDonnell's graduate thesis (submitted in 1989 for a MPP and JD from Regent University). His blueprint for the coming decade was well on point, and indeed even prescient about some of the wackier fringes of the GOP into the 21st century.

by Half the Sins of Mankind posted

I Do Not Think It Means Only What You Think It Means In an article about "Mexican hot dogs" -- distinguishable chiefly for wrapping the dog in bacon before cooking it -- NYT writer John T. Edge refers to this style being even more popular in Tucson than in the rest of the country: In a dozen or more cities across the United States, these Mexican takes on the American hot dog are ascendant — from

by Half the Sins of Mankind posted

The Kind of Catholic You'd Expect a "New American Radical" To Be James Walcott links the Esquire profile of one Mike Austin, who until the article’s publication wrote the blog Return of Scipio. The profile holds Austin up as an example of "the New American Radical"; "he has called President Obama 'evil' and 'malignant,' and he believes, along with much of the hard-line wing of the Republican

by Half the Sins of Mankind posted

God and High School Because I haven't made a blog post out of IMing in a while. A friend (who will go by "DC") posted this on my Facebook Wall with the note, "gosh help us all..."DC: I sent you a youtube video that made me shake my head. I only saw the first 30 secs when they try to tell their friend that India is not in Asia.PG: Oh, there is a lot more to shake your head over. It was giving me

by Half the Sins of Mankind posted

This Is the Debate Conservatives Betsy McCaughey and Sarah Palin accused Ezekiel Emanuel of wanting to limit the medical care available to a child with cerebral palsy. Emanuel's brothers Rahm and Ari are well-known, but he also has an adopted sister -- who has cerebral palsy.

by Half the Sins of Mankind posted

High School I don't know which of my former classmates' actions on Facebook confounds me more:The guy who went to Tulane, failed out because he was partying too much, came back to the local college, graduated and took over his dad's successful insurance agency: Lou DobbsScott Davis is a fan.orThe girl I didn't know well in high school but accepted her friend request because I'm like that, and

by Half the Sins of Mankind posted

If I Say It, They Will Contradict Me I may have to abandon my long-held position that nobody sane will say there is anything racist in a criticism of Obama so long as it is a criticism that would have been made of a white president otherwise identical to Obama. Pretentious elitist, yep; tyrannical socialist, yep; liberal pansy Neville Chamberlain, yep. I had to take Philip Kennicott out of the "

by Half the Sins of Mankind posted

The WaPo Editorial Page Is Full of Fail This Week Today it's Michael Kinsley: You've probably heard by now that Harry and Louise have changed their minds. This fictional couple dreamed up by the health insurance lobby to stop the last attempt at health-care reform -- led by Hillary Clinton in 1993-94 -- is back on the air, declaring that reform is essential. A news release from the insurance

by Half the Sins of Mankind posted

Philip Kennicott Proves Himself the Exception A culture critic for The Washington Post, Kennicott appears to be the one person who does see something racial behind every criticism of Obama -- despite Kennicott himself being a white guy. During last year's campaign, he responded to Republicans' petty criticism of Obama's literal platform to accept his nomination at the Democratic Convention in a

by Half the Sins of Mankind posted

Why Latinos Might Be Angry About Sotomayor's Treatment Eva Rodriguez makes a perfectly unassailable point that Latino voters should not hold against Republican senators a vote against Sotomayor that is based on her legal philosophy ("due process or preemption or disparate impact analysis under Title VII"). What this neglects, however, is that not all of the opposition to Sotomayor that was stated

by Half the Sins of Mankind posted

Or, Uh, The Base-Closing Commission? Ruth Marcus triumphantly ties together two of today's headlines in a single editorial: "If you're interested in how to get health-care costs under control, the case of the F-22 offers an instructive example. ... Which brings me to health care, and one of the most promising ideas for constraining rising costs: Get politics out of the decision making about how

by Half the Sins of Mankind posted

If You Prick Tom Cruise, Does He Not Bleed? Both the NYTimes ad and the publisher's website for the book Valkyrie by Philipp Freiherr von Boeselager (the last surviving member of a group that plotted to kill Hitler) most prominently feature the following endorsement: “von Boeselager’s story is far removed from the new and sanitized Hollywood take on the July 20 plot….[an] astonishing memoir.”-

by Half the Sins of Mankind posted

Isn't This What You Wanted? This WSJ Law Blog post from last Thursday puzzled me: Republican senators are getting at a second bite at Judge Sonia Sotomayor this morning. Their cross exams so far are focused, once again, on the supposed disconnect between Sotomayor, the judge, and Sotomayor, the speaker. The tone has become noticeably chippier this morning, especially from Lindsey Graham (left)

by Half the Sins of Mankind posted

Someday, My Son, You Too Will Have a Monotone From 1986: The Senate hearing room was packed for the vote on controversial federal court nominee Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III, but first Judiciary Committee Chairman Strom Thurmond (R-S.C.) ran through a spate of routine nominations -- reading the names of obscure judges, federal marshals and the like, asking for any objections and briskly

Race, Law Firms, and KIPP by Legal Economics posted

The New York Times, of which I am a voracious reader, recently published an article on the underrepresentation of Blacks at the partnership level in major law firms. The data is indisputable, but the interpretation of the data is not.

Large law firms, attempting to fight the perception of racism and perhaps signing onto some societal goals of racial distributive justice, hire a significant number of minority lawyers whom they would not hire but for the color of their skin. This doesn't mean that the minority lawyers hired are not, generally speaking, high quality law students. However, given the constraint of a limited number of associate positions at every firm, every degree of consideration given to race becomes a degree of consideration not given to other qualities.

To a critic of hiring policies that are not race neutral, the result of few minority associates becoming partners is a natural consequence of this fact. Their assumption is that these other qualities are what make a good candidate for partner. A proponent of the policies, on the other hand, might argue that minorities are excluded because of their race once they become part of the firm, an dthat this could be fixed if firms were to be more proactive. In reality, the reasons why minority associates are less likely than their white colleagues to make partner are complex, and both points are fair ones.

A minority associate most likely has been affected by a long chain of policies preferring minorities: undergraduate admissions, law school admissions, and hiring. The aim of these policies from an equality of opportunity standpoint is to counteract the disadvantages of growing up as a minority. If the policies are simply nudging marginally underqualified people into marginally tougher jobs, then, absent additional resources, they may simply be setting people up for failure who would otherwise succeed. An associate who does not make partner in a top 5 law firm might have made partner in a top 10 law firm, and an associate who does not make partner in a top 10 law firm might have made partner in a top 20 law firm. Having race preferential hiring policies absent some minimum level of additional support for minorities may actually be less desirable for those who share the goals of those policies than not having them at all.

Furthermore, a marginalized minority associate at a corporate law firm in NYC could have used the skills acquired in law school to have become a community leader in a smaller city or town. If we examine the end goals of race preferential policies-- for one, creating positive role models for the next generation of minorities-- I have to wonder whether society wants to encourage large law firms to prefer minorities. Other good reasons may exist for encouraging race preferential hiring policies at large corporate law firms, but at least in this respect the goals seem inconsistent.

In any event, regardless of one's view on race preferential policies for minorities, almost everyone would prefer to eliminate the disadvantages of minorities from the start. The New York Times Magazine recently had a fascinating piece in part on a unique approach to education of poor students. Critics of private and charter schools like to point out that few succeed at educating students where public schools also fail. However, KIPP schools, an uncommon exception, may prove the rule about the worth of exploring alternatives to the traditional public school system and its educational methods.

The idea the biggest differences in the outcomes of former children of poor parents and former children of wealthier parents is in the ways they are raised to communicate is an appealing one. Yet I have to wonder how much of the difference in KIPP's results is based on factors other than teaching philosophy, such as KIPP teachers' willingness to put in 15 hours a day on a regular basis. This amount of work may even make some corporate lawyers feel lazy. Despite the numerous challenges faced by low income students and public school districts in low income areas, I suspect that ultimately the reason many people in this country are undereducated is simply because society sets a low priority on education and has a low expectation of children of poor parents.

What would the world be like if we gave public school teachers in even the lowest income districts the professional respect and salaries of corporate lawyers and investment bankers and in return demanded similarly high levels of performance? My thought is that the government should be require extremely high performance from poor schools and, in return, be willing to throw large enough sums of money at teachers and administrators who are competent enough to overcome these challenges posed by such settings. If we lived in a society with true equality of opportunity, where students from poorer backgrounds consistently achieved as high as students from wealthier ones, perhaps the need for race preferential policies at any level would disappear.

Overpollution by Legal Economics posted

The type of lawyer I will be was determined recently in Torts while we were talking about the Coase theorem and homeowners damaged by pollution. I suggested that if I were a factory owner having the right to pollute and homeowners could pay me to stop, I would choose to pollute much more than I needed in order to hold homeowners hostage for the entire surplus.

To borrow on the example from my class, let's say that when I, the factory owner, have the right to pollute and produce at my operations profit-maximizing level, I cause $500 of harm to 10 homeowners. Let's also assume that they can act as one unit. In this situation, we might think that homeowners collectively would be willing to pay me up to $5,000 if I could eliminate the pollution entirely. Assuming no transaction costs we would ordinarily just set the marginal social benefit of pollution abating equipment equal to the marginal social cost of the equipment.

However, let's assume that I decide to pollute slightly above my operations profit-maximizing level. We have two costs to this: 1) the cost of increased pollution, and 2) the cost of generating excess pollution. If the second cost is roughly nil, in a world without the homeowners I would be indifferent to the level of pollution. However, in a world with the homeowners, the more harm I can cause, the better bargaining position I am in. If I can cause $10,000 in harm instead of the operations profit-maximizing level of harm, I can hold up the homeowners for an additional $5,000 in order to eliminate the pollution. In non-discrete terms, I would have an incentive to cause pollution as long as each additional unit of pollution I caused increased the amount of free money I could get from homeowners later on. In theory, the only check on the potential maximum compensation I would get would be when the homeowners' marginal utility of decreasing pollution met my marginal cost of producing it. However, let's assume the curves diverge. Say the cost of producing pollution is held constant at 0 and the marginal utility of decreasing a unit of pollution is constant.

Now, we would only have to compare the marginal utility of decreasing pollution with the marginal utility of purchasing other goods. Assuming the marginal utility is very high relative to other goods, I could theoretically reduce the homeowners surrounding my factory to the level of subsistence and take virtually all their surplus utility. True evil.

The more interesting point is why this doesn't work. Looking from a broader viewpoint, all of us can do all kinds of things in our lives to harm other people, but usually refrain for good reason. Cooperation tends to be a more effective strategy than defection. People don't like feeling cheated or held hostage. Additionally, if factories owners began doing this to people, their right to pollute would eventually become a right of homeowners not to suffer from pollution (and homeowners might then hold factories hostage for their profits).

The other interesting point is in the distinction between a property right and a right to recover for harm. If a homeowner is particularly sensitive to pollution, a right to recover for harm in a court would require this person prove that unusual sensitivity in order to receive increased damages. However, damages would have to be proven and would have to conform to some standard of reasonableness. A homeowner could not simply get away with claiming that he just really hated pollution and that it was worth a lot of money for him to be pollution free when this preference wasn't within so many standard deviations of the mean preference.

At least to some extent, we want to extend property rights over the right to recover for harm (and injunctive relief over damages) when we want to allow more room for individual idiosyncracies. Perhaps on a broader scale, the ratio of absolute property rights to indeterminate tort rights is a measure of society's valuation of individuality to efficiency.

Strict Liability or Negligence by Legal Economics posted

I really love my torts class and professor (Baker). He is an insurance/economics guy, and I feel like the issues we discuss in class are always on a really high order of abstraction. This makes things very interesting and fun. Baker basically just explains the cases briefly and then asks people questions about (in my mind) more important things-- the principles that are drawn out of the cases.

One of the issues we have been talking about a lot is the trend for courts to hold people or companies responsible for harm to others only when they are negligent.

The standard for determine negligence is generally "reasonable care." In other words, the amount of care a reasonable person would take. Since this is really vague, courts have employed a cost-benefit analysis called BPL. The "Burden" of a measure must be less than the "Probability" times the "extent of Loss" in order for an entity to be held not to have taken "reasonable care."

The negligence standard may have an appeal for intuitive reasons of fairness, but I believe that a strict liability standard would be more efficient.

Imagine that a company can spend from 0 to 100 on safety, and that customers can incur a loss of 0 to 100 from injuries. Companies face declining marginal returns on investment, meaning that the moving from level 0 to 1 produces a lot of decrease in the cost of injuries, whereas moving from level 99 to 100 produces almost no decrease. The optimal level of investment is where the sum of costs (actually net costs, but I'll just refer to them as costs for simplicity) are minimized. The graph would look something like this.



The distance from the point (0,0) to the line is also minimized here. For those of you who weren't math majors and can't tell what the algebraic function would look like from the graph: Cost of Injury = (Some Constant) * (Cost of Investment)^x, where x, the power (exponent) of Cost of Investment, is between 0 and 1. (Fun fact: when x = .5, the angle of the line from (0,0) to the Total Cost line is exactly 45 degrees.)

In this case, the optimal level of investment is 45, and the optimum amount of injury to customers is 25. Because of declining marginal net benefit on investment (because x is between 0 and 1), it is impossible to eliminate all injury.

Assume that the probability that an accident will happen to any one customer is very low. People tend to discount or even truncate low probability, high consequence events when making decisions, so absent a law imposing any liability on the business, it would never bear the social costs of investing no money in safety. Therefore, it's really wonderful that we have liability law. In fact, since x is between 0 and 1, the Total Cost line forms an asymptote with the x-axis. If a company spent 0, cost to injured customers and, in turn, society would be infinite. (I point this out, of course, to show the limitations of using mathematical models. At some point customers would start considering safety. However, within a certain range the model approximates reality quite well, which is why people use it.)

In order to maximize social welfare, we want a company spending less than 45 to raise its spending to the optimal level, and we want a company spending more than 45 (over prioritizing safety) to lower its level of spending to the optimal level.

Now comes the fun part. Social cost is actually a function of the standard deviation from the optimal level of investment of companies in this industry. I won't prove that (partially because I think I lack the math skills, but I would be grateful if someone else would like to in a comment). Just think about it for a second. The further away from optimal a company goes, the greater the total cost to society. In fact, the cost gets greater at an increasing rate.

In other words, we can say that Society's Costs = (Std. Deviation)^x, where x is greater than 1. (I think this is because the power of x in the equation above was less than 1. Now I'd really be interested to see the math if someone wants to tackle this.)

So, we can view reducing standard deviation from the optimal level of investment as a goal in itself. In other words, a low margin of error from optimal is extremely valuable.

Under the negligence standard of "reasonable care," courts are supposed to make this determination. Businesses have to try to pursue not the optimum level, but the level at which they think the court will consider "reasonable." Businesses spend tons of money every year and hire professional industry analysts to try to make precise, quantitative cost-benefit analyzes. If businesses were internalizing these cost-benefit analysis decisions entirely (that is, if they were required to pay for all the costs: the cost of investment and the cost of injuries), then they would have a significant incentive to meet the optimum level of investment as closely as possible and to keep low the industry's standard deviation from optimal investment.

Courts, however, do not employ management consultants with MBAs from MIT. The standard deviation from optimum when the court decides liability under "reasonable care" on a case by case basis will much higher. This is both because the court's own approximation of the optimum level of investment is likely to be imprecise and also because the decisions are somewhat unpredictable-- businesses will have a hard time trying to measure what "reasonable care" is.

Holding a business liable under a relatively strict standard would force businesses to internalize all the costs of injuries. They would ultimately choose something close to the optimal level of investment and then pay for any injuries that did occur. This would both decrease the standard deviation from optimal and decrease the amount of litigation, since the business would have a large incentive to settle most claims when it knew it would be forced to pay most claims.

Furthermore, a business gets a "double payout" for investing in a reasonable amount of care. Not only do they reduce the number of injuries and thus the number of claims they might have to pay, but they also don't have to pay claims at all as long as they exercise what the court considers "reasonable care." Conceivably, this would lead to over investment in safety compared to a stricter standard. Firms under "reasonable care" would be very concerned with erring on the side of caution. Assuming courts don't dictate a suboptimal level of investment to begin with (which is a possibility), this would lead to over investment in safety.

As long as the law can fully compensate me if I am injured, I would personally prefer for firms to be as efficient as possible because this would give me the highest quality service at the lowest cost. Whether they err slightly towards investing too much in safety or slightly towards investing too little is pretty irrelevant to me, assuming the law will fully restore me if I am injured.

I also think issues such as moral responsibility and blame apply only to individuals. When dealing with repeatable, predictable events on a large scale, statistical level, a focus on efficiency and preventability should trump attempting to apply standards of morality developed for individuals to multimillion dollar or multibillion dollar organizations.

Also, some non economists fail to realize that the arguments economists make about efficiency do not have normative components to them. In this case, I am not sure that the other values are incredibly important compared to the extreme inefficiency of the "reasonable care" standard. However, I don't make this claim with much force, and I haven't put a lot of thought into it. I'll stand by my math and economics, but there is much room for debate on the value level.

Waste and Pareto Inefficiency in the Columbia Bookstore by Legal Economics posted

Before arriving for orientation at Columbia (two days before our first class), the administration failed to tell us anything about either our classes or the textbooks we would need for them. We all had to buy them new at the Columbia bookstore instead of having the opportunity to buy them through amazon.com or another source cheaper than the bookstore. The bookstore failed to order enough textbooks despite an agreement with the professors of our Legal Methods course, and there were severe shortages. The store had to have these books shipped overnight at great expense to them and the inconvenience to many students.

I purchased all my textbooks at the Columbia Bookstore as soon as I got my schedule. I carefully read their return policy because I hate to buy new books if I can help it and wanted to try to avoid some of the potential costs to me of the decision by the administration not to give me an idea what textbooks I should buy in advance. The policy stated there and in other places in the store was that I could return the books up until September 14th, the end of the second week of classes at the main campus. Of course, I read all of the exceptions to insure that I would actually be able to return these books if I ordered cheaper ones online, and I even confirmed with the clerk that I would be able to do this.

I went and purchased a ton of cheaper used books online with the intent to return all of my new ones. I also selected the slowest, cheapest shipping method with the understanding that I would be fine to return the books up until September 14th.

When I went to return some today, they pulled out this sheet of paper saying that I had never seen before:



I told the woman that I had never seen that sheet and that the policy they gave me with the receipt says that the last day to return the books is September 14th.

As I anticipated, she told me that that doesn't apply to "special courses." I then whipped out my statutory interpretation skills and pointed her to the relevant text of the policy, which as you can see, clearly states "special one-week courses," not "special courses."



The woman then went into the back, apparently to talk with managers. After a few minutes she came back and told me that the books have stickers which say "no return" on them, but that she would go ahead and make this one-time exception for me. I wasn't going to give up, however, because I still have over $150 worth of books I need to return when I get the used books in the mail.

I said that none of the books I purchased had "no return" on them, and I told her there was nothing about no return on the books as I bought them. She replied that mine must have been the only ones without this information, and then when I challenged her on this she there was something actually on the book description below where the books are.

I told her that if I actually had missed this on the day when I bought my books, then I understood that I wasn't entitled to refunds on these and wouldn't press my case, but she insisted that they would make a one-time exception for me-- they just didn't want everyone bringing their books back.

I went to the back to see how I could've missed these stickers the first time I bought the book because I was genuinely curious and convinced that I had made a mistake. I find one of the books on the list, the Strauss Legal Methods book, and am looking for something that says "No Return." Not being able to find this, I ask the bookstore employee standing to my left if these books are "No Return" and where it stated that. As I ask him this, I notice that he had in his hand a big roll of bright-red "No Return" stickers and that he had been just been plastering these all over the section which contained our "Legal Methods" books. In response to my question, he held up the stickers and said he was about to post one there (by the Strauss book) as well.

He then asked me if I was the one up at the front, and I told him I was and then explained that I had been planning to return many more of the books before September 14th than just the two I had brought with me today. He asked me when I would be able to do it and I said "Probably within a week." He then told me they would make an exception for me and told me to ask for him by name when I came back to return the other books.

This whole fiasco was a pretty clear attempt by the bookstore to enforce a new return policy after we had all already bought our books under the previous policy. While I understand their desire not to lose money on these books, they are the ones who messed up by not labeling the books as "No Return" or adding this into their policy before I bought them. This oversight on their part caused many of us at the law school to order used books online under the assumption we would be able to return them.

I rightly assumed there is at least one other 1L who bought these books before they put up the stickers and now wants to return them. I knew the bookstore would direct them to the stickers if the tried to return the books, so I wanted people to know that these stickers were only put up today, and that the bookstore is clearly in the wrong here, so I posted a message on a CLS '09 Facebook thread.

While I suspect many people will end up getting these refunds, in a way this is a hollow victory. I am sickened by the obvious Pareto Inefficiency of the circumstances surrounding all of this. If the company ends up complying with its own stated policy, then this only shifts the cost of a massive amount of waste they created back onto them, which I think is only fair.

The waste they created is defined as the money students spent on used books ordered to replace these new ones (Used Cost), minus the resell value (Resell Used) adjusted for the shipping costs here and to wherever they would go next (Shipping) and for the extreme hassle everyone would have to go through in order to sell these books and ship them out (Hassle).

More concisely, the waste to law students if the store did not honor its policy would be:

(StudentWaste) = (Used Cost) - (Resell Used) + (Shipping) + (Hassel)

The significant costs to the bookstore of absorbing its mistake would be the restocking expenses (Restocking), the storage fee for all these books for one year and the lost opportunity cost of storing other things (Storage), the loss to capital including the opportunity cost of capital-- in other words, they could have had the money invested in an appreciating rather than depreciating asset-- (Capital), and the potential for massive depreciation of capital if the professors decide to publish a new edition or decide to switch curricula at all (-Resell)+(RiskChange)(CostChange). Of course, 0 < (RiskChange) < 1. Thus, the costs of the waste to the bookstore is:

(StoreWaste) = (Restocking) + (Storage) + (Capital) - (Resell) + (RiskChange)*(CostChange)

One thing I would like to note here is that, if (StoreWaste) > (StudentWaste), then the Pareto-Efficient outcome would be for the students not to return the books and for the store to pay the students some premium (PayOff) in addition to (StudentWaste) in order to have the students deal with the problem. In order to be Pareto-Efficient, that is, beneficial for the bookstore and the students in this circumstance, the equation would have to be as follows:

(Payoff) + (StudentWaste) < (StoreWaste)

A second, more significant level of waste may have been created by the administration's failure to inform student's of their class schedules and required textbooks in time for the students to order used books before arriving at Columbia. The administration may have had good reasons for not having done this, but I think any reasonable person would concede that we should be weighing whatever those reasons are against some precisely-defined costs to the students and the bookstore.

New books experience a high amount of depreciation on sell-back, particularly if students need to write or highlight in them, which is the case with many law-school textbooks. Although compared to the market for other textbooks, the market is much tighter for clean law textbooks and depreciation higher (since most students will still be writing in the clean used book), I'd still estimate that students can save at least 30% by buying a clean used copy and 10% buying a new copy online. (The textbooks bought at the bookstore were not subject to sales taxes, or this would change the formulation to weigh even more heavily towards buying online.)

In addition to the percent savings estimates, I will make the following additional assumptions in calculating the cost of the administration's policy:

1) All students paid an average of what I paid at the bookstore, $246.35.

2) Only new copies were sold to students in the bookstore.

3) 250 out of 350 students in the 1L class at Columbia would have chosen a clean used copy over a new copy if any price difference existed between the two.

4) Out of the 100 students who preferred the the new copy, 50 preferred the convenience of the bookstore over ordering online.

With these things in mind, some simple mathematics can shed light on the cost of the administration's policy of not ordering textbooks (Cost Policy):

(CostPolicy) = ($246.35)*(.7)*(250) + (246.35)*(.9)(50)

(CostPolicy) = 54,197

As this figure suggests, my assumptions allow for a fairly wide variation before (CostPolicy) becomes insignificant.

Before finishing and getting to the reading of these books I'm discussing in the abstract, I'd like to delve into some possible components of (CostPolicy) and suggest that there may be a Pareto-Efficient alternative to the current policy.

First, let's make the simplifying assumption that the only parties we should care about are the law school, professors, and student body. Also, we'll assume while working with the benefits and costs to each entity that no benefit or cost to one entity have any positive or negative effects on any other entity other than effects I state below. This last assumption is highly doubtful given the nature of the relationships among the 3 entities, but we can cast this aside since the outcome I'm going after, Pareto-Efficiency, harms no entity while benefiting at least one entity.

Let's assume that the law school gets a percentage of every sale that the bookstore makes to entering 1Ls. If (KickBack) < (CostPolicy), that is, if the total amount of income the law school receives from these books is less than $54,197, then this situation is Pareto-Inefficient between the two parties. Since professors are also getting royalties from every sale of a new book they have written or edited, then we must add this into the equation as well.

How we account for royalties is a bit complicated, because if a student doesn't buy a new book at the bookstore, that doesn't mean that the professor completely loses royalties for that book, since a student then shifts her purchase to the used market. This purchase in the used market depletes the supply of used books, and the student's markings in the books deplete the supply of clean used books, making the price of all used books higher, and closer to the price of new books. Since new books and used books are imperfect substitutes, the markets for the two types overlap significantly. If the supply of used books falls, the demand for new books rises, although not at a 1:1 ratio (otherwise they would be perfect substitutes).

Even making an educated guess about this ratio, called the degree of substitution elasticity, would require an insanely large amount of data which I, unfortunately, threw away just today thinking I would never need it. In any event, my intuition is that this factor is quite significant and so I will assign it (SubElasticity) a value of .5, which I think is very conservative given the high premium placed on clean copies of the books. I would give this number a much higher weight if I could safely assume the book was used by thousands of students in classes around the country and take the preferences of the 1L students at Columbia as a negligible part of this whole.

Assuming that every new book a student forgoes for a clean used book costs the professors half the royalties they otherwise would have received, assuming that professors at this law school are collectively are receiving a 15% royalty on the books we buy with them as editors or contributors, and assuming everyone bought the Strauss Book which I bought for $92.15 and the optional Greenwalt book which I bought for $17.75, then we can define net royalties (those existing under the current policy, but which would be lost if students knew about their textbooks in advance) as:

($92.15+$17.75)*(.15)*(.75)*(250) or (NetRoyalties) = $3090.94

This is not an insignificant cost, but is of a different order of magnitude than the aggregate cost of the waste imposed on students (CostPolicy), which, again, is $54,197. Even if the law school gets an additional 5% (KickBack) from every book sold at the bookstore, the benefit to the law school and professors combined still doesn't even come close to (CostPolicy).

(KickBack) = (.05)*(300)*($246.35) = $3695.25

(KickBack) + (NetRoyalties) = $6786.19

Now we get to the good stuff! Any "other reasons" that Columbia might have for this policy must add up with (KickBack) + (NetRoyalties) to equal (CostPolicy). In other words, the "other reasons" must be worth $47,410.81. To put it all together simply, if: (OtherReasons) + (KickBack) + (NetRoyalties) < (CostPolicy) then the situation is Pareto Inefficient. As long as (OtherReasons) is less than $47,410.81, and, there may actually be no other reasons, then the situation is not optimal.

The cost of waste to the student body in this scenario is $154.85 per student. The cost of the law school's kickbacks and the professor's royalties combined in this scenario is about $19.39 per student. Subject to significant inaccuracy in accounting for one or more crucial assumptions, the model I've set up clearly shows that the law school community is harmed much more than it is helped by this policy.

To put this more bluntly, if the law school informed students of the textbooks they needed to buy beforehand and incoming 1L students next year simply gave the law school an extra $154.85, the students would be no worse off than they are under the current policy (assuming the bookstore doesn't allow returns) and the law school would have an extra $47,410.81 after they paid off the professors for lost royalties. If the 1L students next year simply compensated the law school and professors for all their losses in exchange for the change in policy, the student body would have an extra $47,410.81 and the school and professors would be no worse off than they are now.

What's important to me as an economic thinker is not whether such a surplus is distributed to one group or another. Certainly, every group would want a share of the bigger pie. However, I am very concerned with the complete waste in aggregate of tens of thousands of dollars if no good (OtherReasons) exist for 1Ls not being able to purchase these textbooks online ahead of time.

Industrial Safety (2 of 3) by Legal Economics posted

The data available comparing the number of railroad workers injured and killed in the late 1800s to the price of preventing most of these injuries and deaths suggests that employees, if employees were assuming these risks for higher pay, were placing an incredibly low value on their own lives. However, a more plausible explanation asserts itself, and that is that people tend to discount both long-term risks and low-probability high-consequences events when making decisions. In other words, someone offered a railroad job was very unlikely to be thinking of (or even have the capability of accurately assessing) the multitude of low-probability high-consequence risks when deciding whether to take the job or not. He was more likely thinking of how he was going to feed his family. Even if a potential employee did consider these risks and demanded a higher wage, the railroad could always find hundreds of other qualified candidates not considering these risks and willing to take a lower wage. In the absence of collective bargaining, we again encounter a race to the bottom-- this time in hiring.

However, before we pull out our copy of Das Kapital and start planning the revolution, we should examine how we could harmonize the incentives of managers with morality.

The Railroad Safety Act of 1886 was an attempt to remedy this situation. The legislature perceived this social inefficiency and properly concluded that there were too many unnecessary deaths and industries in the injury. Their solution to the problem was to require railroads to install certain equipment on the trains which would prevent a significant number of injuries and deaths.

While the legislation succeeded in reducing the number of casualties among railroad workers, it was a blunt ax where a fine scalpel would have been of better use. In light of the confusion in the industry and courts over interpretation of some of the statutes, the simplest solution to this problem (and similar problems in many industries) seems to have been simply to alter the common law doctrine of "assumption of risk" by statute, creating a legal presumption that an industry would be completely or in some significant part liable for any damages suffered by its employees in the course of their work. If companies had to pay out a certain amount every year for every employee hurt or killed in the course of employment and these amounts were assessed in line with people's true values of life and bodily integrity, then the companies would be in a good position to harness their competitive energies towards allocate scarce resources to preventing the greatest number of injuries and deaths as cheaply as possible.

One implication of this solution, given that workers don't properly account for the risk of injury or death at the time an employment contract is created, is that railroads could simply require workers to assume these risks explicitly as a condition of employment. Indeed, this happened in England with railroad safety legislation in the same time period and drained the legislation of all its power. If we are not to accept the inefficiencies of an extremely artificially low value being placed on life and if we assume we can't change human nature to make people fully take these risks into account, only two possible solutions arise.

If workers were not allowed to assume these risks either implicitly or explicitly, companies would be forced to assume liabilities. One of the objections to requiring this in common law was the idea that people should have some sort of fundamental right to contract. More broadly, this belief is based on values of personal freedom and autonomy. A strict deontologist would conclude that these values should never be sacrificed for utilitarian ones, like saving many lives and preventing many injuries. If this is the only feasible way to attain those utilitarian goals in a capitalist system, then I find the argument unpersuasive.

However, John Kenneth Galbraith's concept of countervailing power points to another solution, but a discussion of that concept and solution will have to wait until I can get away from my casebook again.

Industrial Safety (1 of 3) by Legal Economics posted

In 19th century American and English law, the legal doctrine of "assumption of risk" kept workers employed in dangerous industries from collecting damages from their employers for injuries on the job and kept the widows from collecting in the event of death. The primary causes of injury and death were when men had body parts smashed while linking cars together with a pin and when they fell or were knocked off of the tops of moving trains. The percentage workers killed or seriously injured in the railroad industry was staggering, and in an era before the modern welfare state and before workers formed cooperative insurance companies to pool risk, this legal principle effectively condemned widows, crippled workers, and their families to destitution.

The principle of "assumption of risk" was based the belief that railroad workers, upon taking employment in the industry, were accepting the risks of a hazardous occupation in return for better pay, and that this higher pay released the employers from liability. In common law, when a person took employment, he or she was legally presumed to have assumed all the risks of that employment unless the employee and employer explicitly contracted otherwise. Why would presumption be that the employee and not the employer assumed the risk of the occupation? This notion may seem odd to the 21st century reader.

In pre-industrial times, this policy may have made economic sense. That is, holding employees liable might have prevented more injuries and deaths for a lower cost than holding employers liable. In the late 19th century, however, management theorists began to turn the lens of their industrial theories to focus on the problem of risk. If managers were to accept human fallibility as inextricable component of homogenous, industrial process, then they could develop systems which would minimize the risks posed when a worker inevitably made a mistake. The answer to whether workers or employers could best manage risks comes down to an issue of information asymmetry: while a worker may only have had access to his own experiences and those of a few fellow employees, the management of a national railroad company potentially had access to mountains of risk data from which patterns could be inferred.

Because of this asymettry, the argument goes, an employee would have to exert significant resources to preventing injuries, whereas managers could prevent them relatively cheaply. Scientific scrutiny of industrial organization reduced the costs of production for many other commodities, and now the commodity of safety could also be purchased much cheaper.

However, here we encounter the fundamental problem. If a company supplying a homogenous good, coal for example, can devise a way to increase efficiency by lowering the marginal costs of each unit of coal, it can undercut its competitors, steal business, and reap increased profits. The increased profits of the innovator and decreased price of coal in the market induce other coal producers to adopt such a practice (or innovate themselves) in order to decrease operating costs and survive. At the end of this cycle, consumers spend less money to buy coal, and producers operate more efficiently.

In the case of safety this principle operates in quite the opposite way. If workers assume all the risks of their occupations, then a manager has no financial incentive to worry about worker safety. One might argue that a moral incentive is enough, and that a manager should undertake to improve worker safety because it's the right thing to do. However, assuming that any dollar spent on safety is an expense and is not recovered by savings from lower wages (an argument I will address shortly), any dollar spent on safety must come either from increased prices or decreased profits.

As it turns out, neither of these options actually increase the welfare of the business. If the company attempts to pass on the cost increase to indifferent consumers, who only care about the price of the final good (and not about the 1 in 10,000 chance that someone involved in the production of a unit would be seriously injured), then these consumers will begin to buy all their products from the company's competitors, forcing the business either to cease making expenses for safety or to go bankrupt.

One might be tempted to see this situation as a conflict between the greedy company's desire for profit and the safety of common workers. However, if the extra dollar spent on safety is taken as a loss by the company, the return on investment to shareholders will fall. The company must compete with other companies for shareholders' capital just as much as it competes with other companies for product sales. If shareholders are relatively indifferent to the suffering of a company's ex-employees and their families and remove their capital from our socially responsible coal company, the business will no longer have the means to expand and will likely shrink.

What should be drawn from this analysis is that, if a company chooses to be humanitarian in this environment, it will likely go bankrupt or at least remain a localized oddity. The end result is that all successful businesses are immoral.

But wait! What about the assumption of risk doctrine? Isn't a company's cost of labor higher because of the extra pay it gives to workers to compensate them for taking a risky job? If so, wouldn't the company more than make up in savings on wages what it spends on safety?

I will address these questions in the next post.

Introduction: Positive Externalities by Legal Economics posted

The idea for this blog came to me after a discussion section for my first year Legal Methods class at Columbia Law School today. During this class, I had spoken out on a number of issues relating to some legislation passed in the 1890s and a subsequent court case interpreting this legislation. I was tearing into the legislature, the ICC (Interstate Commerce Commission), and a federal appeals court with what were, to me, dry and obvious economic arguments involving phrases such as "perverse incentives" that sounded much more emotionally charged in a legal setting than they ever did to me in my economics classes. I thought I had come off as framing the issues in a very simplistic way, and was a bit embarrassed. I was surprised when, later in the day, several people in my class who made a number of good points themselves, complimented me on the issues I had raised in the discussion section.

The tools of economics have so far been vital to my positive and normative understanding of the law, and I expect they will continue to inform it as I continue through law school. In addition, the context that an economic framework provides helps me better retain the issues of law and legal theory that may be more directly relevant on a final examination. Expressing these thoughts to larger audience and flushing them out more fully through debate may contribute even more to my retention and understanding and, ultimately, to my success in law school and beyond.

Thus, the benefit of readers is not my primary concern, but hopefully my activity will produce some useful externalities.

Wednesday, 25 February

21:00

what ARE they teaching them in school? by the dark goddess of replevin speaks posted

Friday, 30 January

18:00

full circle by the dark goddess of replevin speaks posted

Thursday, 25 January

Sunday, 15 October

Saturday, 26 August

01:00

And like that... he is gone by Three Years of Hell to Become the Devil posted 01:09, Saturday, 26 August

So that's it. RIP Three Years of Hell, June 2, 2003 to August 25, 2006. After all these words, there are only a few things left to say. Two sites, the Imbroglio and the Volokh Conspiracy, have given me a...

And for those without blogs... by Three Years of Hell to Become the Devil posted 00:32, Saturday, 26 August

Dear Wormwood: Our correspondence over these last few years, put together, may be the single longest thing I've ever written. For old time's sake, however, I hope you'll allow me to give you one last list, a few things I...

Advice for 1Ls Starting a Blog: A Much Shorter Part II by Three Years of Hell to Become the Devil posted 22:45, Friday, 25 August

Dear Wormwood: I promised you two letters that might help your friend Scrimgouge in starting a 1L blog. The first letter focused mostly upon matters that any blogger, legal or otherwise, might find useful, be they technical or stylistic. But...

Friday, 25 August

23:00

Welcome to the Continuum! or Passing the Torch by Three Years of Hell to Become the Devil posted 22:21, Friday, 25 August

Say hello to Luis Villa, a 1L at Columbia law school. He's another coder turned lawyer, and his musings on code and law strike a cord. If there's any other Columbia Law School bloggers who would like to tie their...

22:00

Down to the Wire by Three Years of Hell to Become the Devil posted 22:17, Friday, 25 August

Right... self-imposed deadline of tonight to finish this thing off, and still four or five posts that I need to complete. Right now all that quick typing in exams is coming in handy!...

00:00

Advice for 1Ls Considering a Blog: A Very Long Part One by Three Years of Hell to Become the Devil posted 00:51, Friday, 25 August

Dear Wormwood: Who is this Scrimgouge whose email address you've forwarded me? It's certainly very flattering that he's asking you to ask me for advice on starting a law school blog. Nevertheless, there's no good reason for him to ask...

Thursday, 24 August

21:00

Could Be Worse by Three Years of Hell to Become the Devil posted 21:01, Thursday, 24 August

A friend of mine just gave me a "post bar exam gift": a copy of Ichisada Miyazaki's China's Examination Hell: The Civil Service Examinations of Imperial China. From the first page: Competition for a chance to take the civil service...

16:00

Grumpy Old Man Alert: "In My Day, We Didn't Have the 'SONI' System Like You Youngsters. We Read Two Hundred Spam Emails From Every Society Imaginable, And We LIKED It." by Three Years of Hell to Become the Devil posted 16:36, Thursday, 24 August

Forwarded from a current Columbia Law Student, from one of Student Services' fantastic new staff members: We have put in place a new system, the Student Organization News and Information (SONI) System, which allows student organizations and journals to email...

03:00

New York Pungent by Three Years of Hell to Become the Devil posted 02:33, Thursday, 24 August

Strange circumstances conspire to bring me back to New York just before the blog ends. I drove through Jersey late last night. A blind man could smell his way up the Jersey Turnpike. My memory of New York will be...

Friday, 18 August

07:00

The Beginning of the End by Three Years of Hell to Become the Devil posted 07:07, Friday, 18 August

Dear Wormwood: The bar exam is over. I've moved away from D.C. to Another State. [1] And today the last signs of law-student living left me: my free Lexis account no longer works. I feel I shall soon have withdrawal...

An Interesting Paradox by Three Years of Hell to Become the Devil posted 06:12, Friday, 18 August

Over at the Republic of T, Terrance has been chronicling battles in Wisconsin and Virginia over the interpretation of either Defense of Marriage amendments or alterations thereto. The argument is wearily familiar: that the text of the legislation is overbroad,...

Monday, 14 August

16:00

It's a sad day when you find a lawyer asking why evidence of bias is important by Three Years of Hell to Become the Devil posted 16:06, Monday, 14 August

Another "oops" in Lebanese photography, this time from the AP. Fact-checking seems to have gone out of style these days. Worse than journalists, credibility seems on shaky ground with lefty law professors. The ever-dependable for the lunatic fringe view Brian...

Friday, 11 August

22:00

Photoshopping Nonscandal by Three Years of Hell to Become the Devil posted 21:20, Friday, 11 August

I guess the guys at DailyKos are a bit giddy after their victory over Kiss Me Joe, because they're hawking the story of a photoshopping scandal. According to the Kossacks, the GOP decided to paint a Hitler moustache on Howard...

18:00

Why the New York Times Can't Prepare You For the Bar Exam (or your CrimLaw Final) by Three Years of Hell to Become the Devil posted 16:08, Friday, 11 August

Compare and contrast this New York Times editorial on "castle doctrine" laws with this fisking. As those who just took the New York bar will recall, New York requires someone in fear of their life to make reasonable efforts to...

Monday, 07 August

14:00

Blood in the Water by Three Years of Hell to Become the Devil posted 13:53, Monday, 07 August

After forcing Reuters to pull a third rate forgery from its video archives, bloggers are having a field day finding more suspicious photos from the Israeli/Hezbollah conflict. My guess is that many will turn out to be perfectly valid images,...

Monday, 31 July

Wednesday, 05 July

Feeds

FeedRSSLast updateNext update
Blakely Blog XML 13:00, Thursday, 17 May 14:00, Thursday, 17 May
Half the Sins of Mankind XML 13:00, Thursday, 17 May 14:00, Thursday, 17 May
Latest entries from cardozo.blog-city.com XML 13:00, Thursday, 17 May 14:00, Thursday, 17 May
Legal Economics XML 13:00, Thursday, 17 May 14:00, Thursday, 17 May
Luis Villa » Blog Posts XML 13:00, Thursday, 17 May 14:00, Thursday, 17 May
Mathematics Blog XML 13:00, Thursday, 17 May 14:00, Thursday, 17 May
the dark goddess of replevin speaks XML 13:00, Thursday, 17 May 14:00, Thursday, 17 May
Three Years of Hell to Become the Devil XML 13:00, Thursday, 17 May 14:00, Thursday, 17 May