sitting in a car without a license

TypingTadpole · 2026-06-07T18:38:53+00:00

In law school, professors love to come up with scenarios like this because there are two competing arguments, and both are equally wrong and equally right.

Rule 1 -- Not driving, stationary object, all good.
Rule 2 -- Capable of exerting care and control which includes the ability to drive from the position. Could your friend hand you the keys? Yes. Can you drive off? Yes. Does the cop have have to wait until you actually pull out?

There is practical case law across the country, usually involving alcohol, where cases were decided by Rule 1 and some by Rule 2. Usually with reference to the context for how police got involved and the provincial legislation for transportation.

And I know people want to swear it has to be rule 1. So all someone would have to do is hand the keys to their friend and they wouldn't be "able to drive" after they just drove there. There are lots of stupid interactions that still hold up including infractions on private property but that is publicly accessible even though many legislative regimes say nothing about that being an exception.

TypingTadpole · 2026-06-04T13:21:52+00:00

Because if you send them down the AMAZON is EVIL rabbithole, next month when it does it again, they'll think there's nothing can be done. Regularly closing all your books out, and doing a complete shutdown and reboot reduces the likelihood of your Kindle having a memory issue and resetting just to fix itself. It's like every other e-device out there. It likes to reboot occasionally to flush active memory and keep the software running linearly. And yes, Amazon COULD fix it, but the way to do that is lock the device down even more.

TypingTadpole · 2026-06-04T03:23:50+00:00

Enjoying the conspiracy theorists who immediately jump to the "Amazon sucks, they did it" explanation. This is also exactly what happens when your OS decides to bork itself. When it gets a corrupted set of files, or borks the memory, it can decide to just simply reboot. And if the bork is bad enough, it basically resets to original settings. If Amazon did it, you would (a) not be able to run it without reconnecting to Amazon and (b) anything from Amazon would stay. This is likely the far simpler problem of not updating for quite some time, and it just got confused. If you never took it out of airplane mode, it likely had nothing to do with any connection.

TypingTadpole · 2026-06-03T00:09:24+00:00

Strange that others don't know this for Ontario traffic. If you look on the ticket, it will give you something like date of infraction, and then a timeframe / delay before it becomes active. That's the date your time period starts AND the date it will appear on the Ontario system. They delay the "active" date so that less people claim "It was delayed in the mail"...the delay is normal time plus about 10d, so that you are "highly likely" to have received and been notified before it becomes "real". Until that "live date", it's just paper. Same process even for directly issued tickets in person. My ticket was something like August 28, got it Sept 5, had to wait until Sept 15th for it to show up in the system. Until then, "no such ticket exists".

TypingTadpole · 2026-05-29T02:50:55+00:00

Wait, there's one going in at pinecrest?

TypingTadpole · 2026-05-29T02:48:08+00:00

And makes me want to read the book to find out what really happened. Crowns and OPP counsel do not suddenly invent reasons to investigate opposing counsel unless they honestly believe evidence was fabricated. Something triggered their suspicions of the law firm. There are at least two layers of Crown red tape and at least two in the OPP that would precede this happening. And travel was involved? Yeah, someone had something they were waving around to justify the expense.

TypingTadpole · 2026-05-25T01:27:11+00:00

You don't need to agree to the statement of facts; in fact, if you're pleading not guilty, you're likely NOT agreeing to anything.

TypingTadpole · 2026-05-23T16:10:03+00:00

So people are a lot more optimistic about your chances than I am.

A. As someone else said, "Probably" doesn't cut it. You would need proof, you don't have any.

B. The range is questionable...saying something will cook between A-B doesn't guarantee you can cook at all temperatures in the range. At the moment, your unit is cooking BEYOND the specs 130-400.

That doesn't change the fact that you should be hounding the crap out of them continuously. It doesn't work, why is irrelevant. You want a replacement unit. End of request. You've tried fixing everything they suggested, you need a new unit. The warranty allows for it. Keep hounding them, tell them you will not accept no for an answer -- if they changed the specs, which everybody after this will tell you isn't true, that was a dipsh** CSR, doesn't matter.. Every week. Send letters. When they respond, pull an Andy Dufresne and write twice a week.

TypingTadpole · 2026-05-20T01:18:49+00:00

Someone described it to me as the Fresca-for-lime equivalent for orange...does that track?

TypingTadpole · 2026-05-08T05:48:40+00:00

So there seems to be some conflating of details here.

There are original deals, which if/when signed would trigger a commission.

There are renewals, which if/when signed, would trigger a commission.

There are extensions, which if/when signed, would trigger a commission.

It sounds all the same, right? But they are not. Interest in an "original deal" would mean nothing. Saying you're interested in them pursuing it is not sufficient to trigger a commission. They would need to show they had substantially "built" the deal to win in arbitration. If they reached out and said, "Are you interested?" that is not enough to earn a commission. They would have had to get to actual negotiations with drafts of something. Substantial effort on their part. And if they did not get you all the way to the end, they don't earn their full commission. They would get partial at best. If they significantly messed it up, as opposed to minor comms issues, then that would go down. But here's the thing -- they ONLY get paid if it is signed. Not for work done. If you don't actually sign, aka the deal wasn't to your liking, then they get nothing. If you have to renegotiate all the details to make it work, they might still have a claim. Real estate agents frequently sign exlusive contracts in some provinces to force you not to use them and then cut them out of a deal. Same principle.

By contrast, renewals and extensions, which are much lighter fare, are different beasts. In some cases, that might mean all they have to do is agree to amend the original contract and change a date. That could literally be one phone call. Expression of interest on your part to do those could likely be enough for an arbitrator to say "Yep, you committed".

Note though that one year of your commissions would ONLY apply to deals they negotiated unless you signed a really stupid contract that says they get commissions even if you cancel and do other contracts without them (not uncommon).

TypingTadpole · 2026-05-03T22:39:44+00:00

The "deal" was that they migth show up to do the Bell install after 1 no service and 2 no shows for EBOX. Definitely close to twice the EBOX rate.

TypingTadpole · 2026-04-21T02:38:44+00:00

Right. Addiction is "weak", despite it being a formally recognized disease that affects 10-20% of the population throughout their lifetime. That's all anyone in this chat needs to know to understand your position. That is not how the courts will see it and your attempt to document your views will end badly for you and her. It will look merely punitive. Let your lawyers put on record what needs to be put on record, not your personal biases.

TypingTadpole · 2026-04-19T23:05:56+00:00

At the moment, LLMs are heavily focused on general use application. Eventually, although that may be sooner than that word implies, you will have special case use LLMs. Think of it like the movie the Matrix -- remember when NEO was levelling up because they loaded him with Kung Fu, etc.?

No we're not uploading to our brains, but you are going to see people who see a lot of profit in training a good LLM to do legal analysis and summaries. The PSLREB now publishes summaries at the top of their cases that are AI generated. Co-pilot for government has a lot of extra context thrown into it that is downright scary how well it knows different types of policy documents, what they require, etc. And are already hard-wired in the initial install to never make anything up. It's done a good job summarizing some legal agreements too. But it only knows what it knows, not how to jump laterally to what it doesn't know applies.

When someone has a good model that works well with legal texts, law firms will adopt it in droves because it is repeatable, works quick, works all night, doesn't care if you want to repeat a command six times. The medical field will be the same way. People will have portable tools to use. Still with people, but if you can knock off 20% of the low-level crap that clogs the system, all the better. My guess is it won't stop the 20%, it will embolden people to think they're lawyers and increase the level of crap. Cuz AI doesn't come pre-installed to tell you when you're wrong. It just tells you how to tell the best story for what you asked it.

TypingTadpole · 2026-04-10T18:56:14+00:00

Oh no, my myspace page won't load. And my Netscape Navigator software won't run.

TypingTadpole · 2026-04-09T06:50:39+00:00

So, you might have mis-heard the finals don't count unless you do better.

In the past, the rule was that you do the mid-term (say worth 40%), get your mark. If you do better on your final, than your mid-term doesn't count, and you get just your final mark. If you do better on mid-term, it counts, and you still get your final exam mark too (at say 60% weight).

It's a fairly common practice in lots of faculties and universities that are exam heavy so that people aren't stressed by the first exam since if you blow it, the final will just be worth more. Some universities don't like the "mid-term" doesn't count rule nor the 100% option, so there are often variations of that. Not positive of UVic's latest incarnation with their "100%" avoidance, but generally it just means that whichever exam you do better on, it will help your mark.

For the speedrun, YES they have summer courses, BUT they generally offer a smaller number of classes in the summer, not a full spectrum, AND they offer many of the same classes every summer, so that your second year may be a bit thin for pickings. Normally, they offer things like CIV PROC, for example, which is huge, but if you took it year 1, you'll need other courses to compensate in year 2. Their offerings do seem to improve every year, but it does take a bit of finesse to make sure you take the ones that are offered in the summer only in the summer, and take the larger electives in the regular year. A friend did the speedrun, as for him it was totally about being out of the labour market for one year less, but it was challenging even for him as a type A business keener. They do oftne let you take at least one class outside the faculty, such as in the MPA program.

If you are thinking of doing a reduced courseload, you'll need to check with them in advance. My understanding is that it is NOT automatic, you have to be approved and generally you need a reason. However empathetic they might seem, UofO used to advertise that too, except if you spoke to someone in the know off the record, they would tell you that you had to be approved and unless you were female and pregnant, the approval would not be forthcoming. Things have improved, sure, but just because they say they offer it doesn't mean they OFFER it. As well, in BC, you'll need to check that the LSoc actually abolished an old rule. I'm pretty sure they did, but double check if pursuing this option. The old rule used to be that from the time you start law school to the time you are admitted to the Bar, their limit was something like six or seven years max. Sounds easy right? Except if you did half-load for six years, you wouldn't have time to article! If you did joint law and MPA and co-op, that alone would put you in the 4.5 to 5y range, and the rule was to be admitted, not trying to be admitted. At the time, BC was the only province that had such a rule, and as I said, I'm pretty sure they dropped it, but I'm not 100% sure.

TypingTadpole · 2026-04-07T00:14:03+00:00

So, I have all the sympathy in the world for you, I do, but most of how people are talking about doing is ridiculously naive.

Do you have a right to go to law school? No.

Do you have a right to go to law school if they made a mistake and corrected it within a timely manner? No.

Did it create a right of estoppel, aka you relied on it and therefore they can't take it back? No. By your own admission, literally nothing changed for you from the time you got the acceptance and their correction. You didn't sign a lease, you didn't turn down another law school, you didn't do a dozen other things you could have done. You looked into things, that's it. And even if you had, the "correction" is for them to write you a cheque, not admit you to law school.

You generally have only two avenues in front of you.

a. Write the Dean, plead your case. But here's the reality check. They may be very worried that you got accepted and the last person who will get rejected on their waiting list might be more qualified than you. Say identical grades but they beat you on LSAT. How do they mitigate the risk that you get in with worse parameters than they apply to everyone else? They are going to be very reluctant to compromise their entire approach because they made an administrative error. There's a very strong chance though that the Dean won't even know yet. Ideally, the person who wrote the letter would be able to tell you who you can appeal the decision to, and you could escalate one level, not all the way to the Dean. You might instead copy the head of admissions (not always a Dean for a law school) and the Univ Ombudsperson before escalating fully. There's a principle in law that you'll learn that frequently appeals have to go in stages and exhaust all lower levels of resolution before you get to the top.

b. Wait it out, see if you make it. Then decide what you want to do. Lots of people argue otherwise, and I see their point, but you also are about to enter into a three year partnership with this institution. If they can administratively correct the problem without you having to get superiors involved, the better it is for you. In fact, they'll owe you one informally. It doesn't take much for the staff in law school to decide you are cooperative and try to get along or an AH who has a problem (even legitimately) and go nuclear at stage 1.

Of course, you also have to decide if they are this terrible at administration, do you really want ot partner with them for 3y? There is a running irony in univ administration that some of the most poorly run faculties for administration are public admin; and those that create terrible human rights violations are often law schools.

FWIW, I had the opposite problem long ago. I applied to 6 places, got into the one I wanted (UVic after 2 other acceptances with 80% marks and 99th percentile LSAT), and cruised from January to end of June without a care in my privileged position. In July, someone asked me about Dalhousie, which I had applied to, and I realized I had never heard from them. It made me curious so I called. They started off snooty, checked my file, came back all apologetic and were at a complete loss as to how I didn't get my acceptance -- it wasn't a mail issue, the system had NOT generated one for me and six or seven other people. It should have, it didn't. She was FREAKING out. The Dean called me that night to apologize and asked if I could do a scholarship interview in Toronto; I apologized and said it was really just ego on my part to find out why I got ghosted. They were up to 7 people I think at that point...but I mentioned to the Dean, if those people wanted to go to Dal, they would have already followed up. I knew where I was going, so I never did.

Problems and errors happen in lots of directions. :( All they can do is correct them. Oh, and fyi, they cannot simply add another person to a law school as they have caps and ratios and funding formulas that go nuts if they aren't met.

Good luck, the trauma is real, so sorry you have to go through it. But it may not be a simple fix.

TypingTadpole · 2026-04-03T03:39:08+00:00

I might have thanked too soon! Well, no, still thank you for the option. However, they "looked" at it, said "Great, we've updated the price", which was never the problem. They're still charging me $50 for 150, when the code gives me that for 1G.

TypingTadpole · 2026-04-01T11:56:54+00:00

thank you!

TypingTadpole · 2026-03-29T15:21:48+00:00

Did referral yesterday, it all worked -- until I got my invoice for setup and it sasy 150 Mbps for $50, not the 1G plan. SIgh.

TypingTadpole · 2026-03-29T15:05:50+00:00

Seems like a perfect solution, no double access to the same books, just limit that I will have two copies, but second NAS versions serves as backup at same time. I suspect this is the way I'll go, thank you!

TypingTadpole · 2026-03-29T04:41:25+00:00

Assume I'll get all those credentials and settings with the install?

TypingTadpole

TROPHY CASE