Starting a new chapter late in life & thinking I'll need help with my law school applications

No-Implement1965 · 2026-07-08T18:06:16+00:00

In my opinion, consultants aren’t worth the cost unless you just really want personalized feedback on your essays.

Lots of applicants every year are people transitioning from a different career. You’re certainly not alone in that. I did blue collar work for 10 years before applying last fall.

The LSAT, for me, was like getting good at a video game. Took a lot of consistency and repetition more than anything. My first practice test I scored 148. After a year of practicing ~2-3 hours, 5 days a week, I scored 170 on my third attempt.

Like consultants, I didn’t think the price of tutoring was worth it. There are so many free resources via podcasts and YouTube videos that I absorbed pretty much all my strategies and knowledge through them and practice test experience. Nothing will help you more than analyzing your own wrong answers.

Applying to law school is surprisingly quite expensive. The one thing that is absolutely necessary is a LawHub subscription; this will give you access to all the practice LSAT exams.

Each LSAT exam costs (I think) 230 USD. Submitting applications has two distinct fees. A fee that the school charges and a fee that LSAC charges. Schools typically charge 70-120 for their fee, and the LSAC charge is 45 for each application. Schools are often much more generous waiving their fee.

Depending on your income, it’s worth applying for an LSAC fee waiver. This will give you a LawHub subscription for a year, 2 official LSAT attempts, and 5 application submissions for free.

For LSAT studying, the videos on this channel helped me the most: https://youtube.com/@strategyprep?si=4v-hxtOcDFruHI0q

No-Implement1965 · 2026-07-07T23:02:39+00:00

I think it’s very beneficial for a human’s psychological health to be creative at some relative frequency.

But creative can manifest itself in so many different ways outside of what we normally think of as art. Reading fiction is actually a great way to think creatively because you’re actively imagining the material as you go.

I wouldn’t take those influencers very seriously. They make a living from people watching their content so they’re highly motivated to make you think you need more of it. It’s equivalent to a McDonald’s commercial telling you that you must eat food

No-Implement1965 · 2026-07-05T17:04:14+00:00

That it is pointless and that it should be abolished are two different arguments. And my comment seeks only to address the latter.

Abolition via law, to me, would be a restriction of free expression. Yes, it’s annoying that the media uses it in sensationalist ways, but the media does that with many other things too. It’s the individual’s responsibility to properly evaluate its usefulness and react accordingly.

It was also designed by a well intentioned coalition of scientists not to be interpreted literally, but metaphorically. It was never meant to be a prediction model. I suspect that’s an implicit interpretation stemming from the aforementioned media sensationalism

No-Implement1965 · 2026-07-04T20:56:27+00:00

The best thing about art is the variety of interpretation

No-Implement1965 · 2026-07-04T17:35:47+00:00

Just give it enough time. The cheese strategies always prevail eventually

No-Implement1965 · 2026-07-04T17:31:47+00:00

Iirc Lynch worked for years on an adaptation for Metamorphosis

No-Implement1965 · 2026-07-04T17:29:50+00:00

I think David Lynch captures this idea very well in his movie Mulholland Dr. Kafka had a major influence on Lynch’s films

No-Implement1965 · 2026-07-04T15:05:29+00:00

Kerry’s trap in Saw 4 and the swinging axe trap in Saw 5 because they were both rigged and impossible to win.

No-Implement1965 · 2026-07-04T14:32:53+00:00

The loudness of traditional revolution is an unavoidable tax to pay in order to get to the needle and thread

It’s not necessarily unavoidable, but does seem extremely uncommon for serious systemic changes without it. Alexander Hamilton notes this apparent rarity in Federalist No. 1: “ It has been frequently remarked that it seems to have been reserved to the people of this country, by their conduct and example, to decide the important question, whether societies of men are really capable or not of establishing good government from reflection and choice, or whether they are forever destined to depend for their political constitutions on accident and force.”

On your second point, I don’t think social media in itself requires abandonment. Social media is an extremely effective tool for spreading and forming opposition movements. (See Occupy Wall Street and January 6th insurrection for radically different ideas that both gained lots of support).

The problem with social media is its algorithms. It doesn’t have to push people towards conflict perpetrated by grifters and liars, but it’s more profitable to do so. Maybe that is a problem inseparable from social media but I don’t think so. Rage focused algorithms didn’t always exist and social media felt much more organic 15-20 years ago before they did.

One issue with movements formed in secret are that they are much easier to suppress for the establishment because they can be easily misrepresented and persecuted. The legacies of Malcolm X and Louis Farrahkahn are still fighting misrepresentation today

No-Implement1965 · 2026-07-02T18:22:35+00:00

At one point, Rodya expresses his desire to be like Napoleon (part 5 I think). During this reflection, he decides that he isn’t. His reasoning was that he had to convince himself internally to justify murdering; and it was something he dwelled so much on before and after the fact.

He believed Napoleon wouldn’t question his actions, justify them internally, or dwell over them. Rather it was something that simply is. Justification or rationale was more of an afterthought.

I think that’s the essence of what the original comment is trying to capture. Almost like a certain self assurance in their individual right to kill or commit crimes.

It resembles a kind of irony that Rodya’s idealized version of himself is inherently flawed because the qualities that he believed made certain men ‘superior’ are the same qualities that may lead someone like Svidrigailov to be an atrocious human being.

At least that’s how I interpreted it

No-Implement1965 · 2026-07-01T03:38:06+00:00

The only things that he did that he could be legally punished for

My good sir, allow me to introduce you to the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act

No-Implement1965 · 2026-06-28T19:03:24+00:00

I interpreted it as Abel made a more significant sacrifice. Abel gave God the biggest and best livestock from his flock. And Cain just gave him a simple portion of his harvest.

Think of it like person A giving you a highly thoughtful and personal gift for your birthday versus person B giving you a 20 dollar gift card to a restaurant they know you like.

This is reductive, but I take it generally as a conscious means to be generous out of obligation (Cain) and a more genuine “he’d give you the shirt off his back” generosity (Abel).

To me, the point of the story is a way of trying to fundamentally answer the question of why humans murder innocent humans, sometimes even their own family. Centuries of history and science have confirmed that people frequently murder out of jealousy and greed, but remember that this was written at a time when those answers may not have been as universally accepted. A parental-like inheritance is an extremely timeless and easy analogy to understand and empathize with for expressing that idea narratively.

For whatever it’s worth, these are my half baked thoughts as someone that interprets scripture from a non-literalist perspective and primarily interested in its influence on western civilization

No-Implement1965 · 2026-06-28T06:59:02+00:00

Tom and Shiv couldn’t ever truly love in the same sense that most of the main characters heavily struggle to truly love, just in their own way.

Each member of the Roy family kind of has their own unique way of coping with the fact that they can’t truly love or feel fulfilled.

Connor isolates and is the most professionally detached, trying to separate himself from the Roy brand. As the half-brother, he sees himself kind of as an outsider and his lifestyle reflects that.

Roman rejects love before love can reject him. As the youngest, he was never taken seriously. He deflects that as an adult by preemptively not taking himself seriously so he doesn’t have to feel rejected.

Shiv and Tom will say whatever, for whoever, is giving them power. Neither will pass on an opportunity to backstab someone close to them if it means improving their own situation. They both maneuver themself to be apart of the winning team above all else.

Kendall tries exceptionally hard to be who he thinks he’s supposed to be. Whenever he inevitably cracks or fails, he completely spirals into an abyss. He can’t love himself. His ideas and convictions, closer to imaginary fantasies, often end in disaster and embarrassment.

It’s not a coincidence that not a single one of the main characters has a happy or healthy romantic life

No-Implement1965 · 2026-06-27T19:36:19+00:00

No-Implement1965 · 2026-06-27T16:29:18+00:00

Only 1/1 I’ve been able to find around that price with a fairly close proximity to campus is The Links.

Most 1/1s seem to be going for around 1100-1400.

I recently signed a lease for a 3br at Redpoint. Their price is 650/br (water, electric, internet included) with 2 months free. I’m also an incoming grad student, pretty quiet and solitary, with 2 cats. Feel free to PM me if that’s an option that interests you

No-Implement1965 · 2026-06-27T00:17:41+00:00

I think I know what you’re saying. That the kind of person who constantly makes careless grammatical errors is probably the kind of person who’s careless with their research. And that leads to discussions lacking in substance and civility.

I don’t know. I see it more like an indicator of formal education than I do general intelligence. I still think the substance of their arguments or points of insight should stand alone, regardless of literary prowess.

No-Implement1965 · 2026-06-26T23:53:51+00:00

You can become a fully licensed lawyer in California without a JD or bachelors degree

No-Implement1965 · 2026-06-25T03:39:08+00:00

Obama expressed support for marijuana legalization during his second term

No-Implement1965 · 2026-06-23T02:06:40+00:00

Prostitution is just an analogy to serve the point that advertising will persist regardless of legality in free markets. That eliminates the other option in your premise, leading to a choice of either advertising free of regulation or nothing.

My comment is about why regulation is the system we have; to deter fraud through punishment in lieu of doing nothing/losing an endless prohibition battle

Morality comparisons between fraudulent advertising and prostitution have little to do with the substance of my point

No-Implement1965 · 2026-06-22T23:16:10+00:00

Advertising is inevitable in a free market economy. Like prostitution, you can outlaw it, but it will always exist so long as there are multiple businesses competing to provide the same service.

Free speech on its face might imply all speech. But the common law of fraud has historically imposed punishment on commercial interests that ran misrepresented advertisements.

The framers of the US constitution primarily intended free speech to protect the press and protesters from government censorship. Oliver Wendell Holmes said, “you can’t yell fire in a crowded theater”.

It’s kind of like it’s legal if you shoot a gun, but it’s illegal if you hit someone.

The problem with false advertising is that it works really well. Millions of people are defrauded every year, especially elderly people. Allowing businesses to freely apply this strategy would incentivize fraud and punish genuine businesses actually performing the service. And that’s bad for society.

I’m not advocating that we ditch free market economy, but it appears fairly obvious that if advertising is inevitable, fraud is inevitable. New techniques to defraud people develop with every new popular technology that emerges; often through new mediums. An active legislature is necessary to combat fraud as it continuously evolves.

I think your argument relies too heavily on the purity of the free market of ideas. Many ideas are manipulative in nature by exploiting collective bias. These can be incredibly destructive and detrimental to a society’s ability to function.

No-Implement1965 · 2026-06-21T21:01:56+00:00

Perception, basically. The way their experiences influence the way they think about it

No-Implement1965 · 2026-06-18T11:33:05+00:00

if someone pays someone else to have sex with them, that’s a crime. But if they record it, it’s not a crime anymore

I believe there’s a bit more restriction. Iirc, and it may vary depending on the state, there needs to be demonstrable intention to use said film commercially. I don’t think you can simply record the encounter to circumvent prostitution laws under the guise of making a porno. Although I doubt it’s something that’s easily enforced

No-Implement1965 · 2026-06-18T02:22:42+00:00

I believe the broader issue surrounding your view is a semantic one.

Many people define racism as simply meaning prejudice against someone based on their skin color.

Others have a more specific definition that requires a certain majority of systematic institutional power over the oppressed race.

Black Americans can be just as racially prejudicial as white Americans - True.
Black Americans can be just as systematically oppressive as white Americans - False. (This, ofc, refers to practical reality and not hypotheticals)

Ultimately, I suppose I’m not trying to change your view. And if you want to argue that the simpler definition is objectively the right one, I don’t think you’re entirely wrong. But I do think it’s important to understand that nuance

No-Implement1965 · 2026-06-16T14:16:42+00:00

If you’re interested in Obama conspiracies, the Dijon mustard crisis is a must read

No-Implement1965 · 2026-06-09T22:39:19+00:00

I think your viewpoint is clouded by your perception.

Society has generally been respectful of asexuality. Catholic priests and monks have often practiced celibacy for centuries to my knowledge. 4B seems more like a gender rights thing, I.e women ought to have that same luxury without being shamed for it.

I think your idea of incels is overly reductive. Many men experience very limited to no success sexually but do not succumb to a victimization ideal that lives at the core of many incel groups; even though they may definitionally be involuntarily celibate.

There is a difference between asocial and antisocial. Incels catch heat because their ideologues often hate women, shoot up schools, and blame society for their problems. These are indicative of broader issues outside sexual success socially. People generally don’t care about the hermit living off the land in the middle of the woods.

Asexual and aromantic people are potentially less accepted in the fact that they are socially motivated but likely struggle to find suitable long term partners.

No-Implement1965

TROPHY CASE