I read about William Kamkwamba, the boy who built a windmill in a rural area of Malawi that was eventually able to power several houses and a water irrigation system in his village. It is an incredibly inspirational story that I urge everyone to read.

What really got me thinking though were some of the comments of the Toronto Star readers. Among the praise, vitirol, and accusations of the whole thing being fake, there are a couple of issues that need to be discussed.

“And….just why exactly is a story about someone in Africa a lead story in a Toronto newspaper? Has multiculturalism confused us that much that we cannot distinguish between Malawi and Toronto?”
- granted this was written by someone who calls him(her?)self “Canada for Canadians”. I didn’t even realize there was such a movement afoot. This is dangerous close-mindedness. Reminds me of “Germany for the Germans” (that led to the Holocaust) and “Russia for the Russians” (that led to beatings of Jews and people from the former USSR republics in the late 90′s and early 2000′s). Aside from that, the comment is itself idiotic: Toronto Star has a “World” section for a reason. Some people are actually interested about what happens outside of Toronto.

“Good to see people taking some initiative in life to make things better for themselves and the people around them. I had the same idea a year ago and ran it across my colleagues. It was immediately shot down because of the noise pollution laws. I think it’s an excuse to protect the utility companies. http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2009/06/10/ontario-wind-turbines.html”
- I would like to know how much of this is true and if anyone can chime in, please do. I understand NIMBYs to some degree (I wouldn’t want a wind turbine howling outside my window all day and night), but I’d like to know how much of the bylaws are there to protect a government monopoly.

“Compare this amibitous young man with our average (not all, average) Candadian teenager. He was driven to do something better for himself and his community. Canadian teenagers are no longer driven, parents give them everything they want (not just need anymore, want) so there is no reason for them to be ambitious. Parents actually complain when their children are given homework! Instead of encouraging our children to learn, earn and become productive, we are encouraging them to be lazy and entitled.”
-I take some issue with this comment. It is true that necessity breeds invention, but so does laziness. We in Canada are lucky to have a lot more than they do in Malawi, but this does not mean that we stop inventing. Our invention and innovation happens on a different level (the two university-aged guys who started RIM are a good example. Across the border, two similar types of guys started Google).
As for homework, if you looked at grade-school homework recently, you would see that a lot of it is mindless busywork (i.e. the “guess and check” crap that grade school math teachers love to assign). It takes hours and teaches precisely nothing. It’s good to assign homework, but school-aged kids also need time and energy to think and to create. By assigning mindless busywork, we are not creating inventors, we’re creating drones, and that is something to complain about. I’d rather see kids get no homework and spend their time entertaining themselves (and maybe creating something in the process) than spend time doing mindless busywork.
Of course not all homework is busywork, but I remember going through school and I’m seeing my sister go through it now, and almost half of all homework by time is stuff that teaches absolutely nothing and could be eliminated with no detriment to education.

I had to repost this, it is just oh so cool. (WARNING: Toxic amounts of  geekiness lie ahead). Find the original and all the comments here, courtesy of LawIsCool. I will say right now that this was not my work and I had nothing to do with it, except having a lot of fun reading it.

Also, I am done two of my six exams. So far, so good (I think…I hope).

I am currently sitting in the law library, surrounded by volumes and volumes of very official-looking books (having words like “law reports” and “legal digests” in their titles) going as far back as the 15th century. I am now realizing the key to success in law school (and probably law practice): learning how to deal with loads and loads of information being bombarded from all sides.

In preparation for exams (which start next week!), I have created a summary of what I learned in every course. These summaries range from 30 to 50 pages per course and there are six courses. I don’t think I have ever dealt with this much information that was not cannot be dumped into a spreadsheet or database. And yet I have to have all this information in mind when I write the exam.

I’ve been told that law school (especially first year) would be hard. I believe I was misinformed. Law school is not hard. The material is relatively simple to anyone who can make a reasonable argument and then see its counterargument. What makes law school “hard” is that volume of material can be overwhelming. The trick is to stay on top of it and organize it in a way that makes sense.

That and to make your own summaries.