And even if it is illegal somewhere. So freaking what ? It’s illegal for women to speak loudly or sing in Afghanistan - should women in India shut up then ? It’s illegal in Iran to be gay - so they’ll transition you to the opposite gender if you want to marry the love of your life. Shall we start following that practice in India ? It’s illegal in north Korea to say mean things about dear leader - why should the rest of us play along?

Yes. Remember the girls in the Bishop Cotton video some years ago? Same thing happens in law school. Tearing hair, breaking glasses, kicking, vulgar MC-BC abuses … law skool gurls can get pretty wild. And they fight over boys as well, just as guys fight over girls. Even the Bishop Cotton fight was over a boy.

Don’t talk like an idiot. Pickle ball is not “unathletic”. There is a real chance of it entering the Olympics in 2032. The sport gives you a good workout. Maybe not as much as tennis, but comparable to badminton and certainly more than table tennis.

The reason it is popular is because it is not a very technical game, like tennis, and the basics are easy to learn. Also games are quite short.

Go with what you like, dear fellow. Your money, your choice, your taste, and your satisfaction. A bit of unsolicited advice though: in watches, as in all of one's life, function always supersedes form for it is through function that we make our lives purposeful. It is through function that the aesthetic realises its permanence. And while it is certainly worthwhile to appreciate the beauty of a thing or a person, yet to make a fetish of their form is to give up one's own self to the fleeting attraction of one transient, already departing moment with the satisfaction dervied from which rarely outlasting the moment itself.

Let's say, hypothetically, that a 4-6 year (anonymity purposes) tier 1 general corporate/M&A/PE.VC guy wants to switch in-house for some sanity, and don't mind a minor paycut, what are the options/alternatives that you guys have done/seen done.

Are in-house at funds a bad idea - is it same as the law firm, or slightly better.

Guessing companies don't really have dedicated paying M&A teams or need one, when anyway we do all the work.

Is the firm gen corp experience too niche, for in-house legal team work, where I'll look like a doofus for the kind of work that comes in the way of in-house counsels who get paid at my level.

Am I stuck, or is it not too early to bounce?

(1) Not an overstatement, just the literal truth. Can't reveal more, or facts about my life and situation that would serve as really helpful hints in understanding who I am would come out.

(2) No, the world doesn't deserve anything of the sort, especially if said teachers would be embarrassed at having their names revealed on a public forum to which they don't have access or which they don't visit/know of. This is because they have no chance to see what is said about them, or respond in any way. What those fabulous teachers specifically in my case, and extraordinary teachers generally, deserve is to have tributes paid to them non-anonymously (as I have done, by means of email correspondence in my case) and anonymously (as I and several others have done on here). I hope you are not so jaded as to believe that students don't respect teachers' wishes and feelings anymore; if you are, please modify this attitude of mind. This is why I don't understand the level of disbelief communicated. The cynicism demonstrated here is disappointing and disheartening. It's not your fault, working conditions in academia the world over are problematic, but you have allowed the problems to get to you - and that's something you may have to consider working on.

PS: As a sign of consistency and good faith, to show that I wasn't just bullshitting about the life-changing teachers. John Tasioulas, the Professor of Ethics and Legal Philosophy in Oxford, recently tweeted about how in the academia contexts he is familiar with, research is valued far too much at the expense of teaching. As an attempt to cure this wrong thought-process, he asked his followers (which includes me) to tell him about inspiring undergraduate teachers they had had in law and/or philosophy; he kicked off the conversation by listing a couple of Australian academics, including some big names in Australian legal academia. Though I follow Tasioulas on Twitter and engage with his content whenever I can, and though I loved his thought and his prompt to talk about undergraduate teachers, I didn't respond to his prompt, not because I am scared of things being revealed about me (my life-story is emblazened like a banner on my Twitter profile), but because the specific individuals who came to mind upon seeing his prompt (the very same ones who came to mind when seeing this thread) no longer use Twitter, and therefore would have no opportunity to respond; as far as Legally India goes, I doubt they have heard of it (or would want to remember it, if they had).

It's bizarre and amusing how a partner found guilty under POSH was reinstated just a month after suspension. Despite being a ▮▮▮, a prominent name ▮▮▮ has brushed it off as if nothing ever happened. This firm has a history of retaining attorneys who have harassed female colleagues while working there.

https://www.barandbench.com/news/after-dsk-legal-ads-bci-condemns-lawyers-advertising-services-on-social-media

Suddenly the videos have disappeared.

If you want to make a switch. Now is the time ! You have a year left. I would suggest starting preparing for CAT and secure a top IIM. Majority of people I know who lost interest in law either went for an MBA, one in CA, one in IPS, one in state PCS, one in public policy, one in army etc. Do not wait to graduate, start working on a different career. Otherwise you'd end up going from llb to LLM to phd and hate law forever.

I am ending my fourth year, 4 corporate internships, and 2 litigation internships to my name. I don't know if I simply don't like the law firm environment, or I feel like I am not good enough for this law firm career as my peers are better than me. Whatever it is, everyday I feel a little more estranged from this profession. Should I wait for this feeling to pass? Because I am in a financial situation where changing careers is not an option. Does it get better? Would choosing a job as an in-house counsel be better?

As an industry insider, I can tell you that data privacy-focussed hirings happen rarely in T1s. There are, loosely speaking, less than 10 teams that do heavy data privacy work across CAM, SAM, KCO, Trilegal, JSA, Indus, Luthra & Saraf. Most of these teams rarely see exits due to market saturation. Higher-paying Tier 2 firms rarely do data privacy to begin with.

As for IP law, the situation is slightly better, but many firms like KCO pay nearly half to the IP team, when seen in comparison to other corporate areas, which have at least a hundred teams across leading law firms.

So if you're planning to start your career and don't have clientele or industry connections, my brutally honest advice is to not target data privacy or even IP.

take a rupee note and read the scripts (if you can read anything apart from eng) check how may ways the word rupee is represented in other languages

what we need at the moment is a third language in Hindi speaking states where it is some other official language (and no, not sanskrit)

I gave UGC-NET december 2024, on the basis of 4 year UG course, which was in their rules itself and qualified for JRF.
UGC Regulations, 2022 replaced the old 2016 regulations adding a new category to allow direct PhD after 4 year UG Course.

But most of the universities still are following 2016 regulations and have not updated the same,

I do not want to do an LLM. I rightly qualify according to the rules, and I should be allowed to enroll in PhD. I want the universities to follows the Rules.

What to do in such a situation?

Pickleball is an emerging racquet sport for those who can’t play racquet sports. It is dull and unathletic. Even Subway Surfer requires more mental faculty than this picklish ball. If it’s being used as linkedin or bumble, that makes sense because you will never run out of breath to happily announce your latest job-switch or enunciate 10 business insights from playing a pointless game of Tickle ball.

Far from the mediative focus that traditional racquet sports offers and demand, Pickleball takes it to eleven by providing you enough time between returns and smashes to scan for your prospective muse, both personal and professional, for a financial year.

It is the Black Eyed Peas of racquet sports. In the unforgettable words of Robert California “it’s rock and roll for people who don’t like rock and roll; it’s rap for people who don’t like rap…”

I graduated from law school last year (2024) and have been jobless ever since. The only work experience I have is a 1.5-month stint at an LPO, which I absolutely hated due to the toxic work culture, low pay, and night shifts. Since then, I’ve applied to over 1,500 jobs—Tier 1 firms, mid-size firms, small firms, in-house roles, cooperative banks—you name it. And I’ve been rejected by all of them.

At this point, I’ve come to the difficult realization that I may not be cut out for the legal profession. By biggest flaw was my sub par research skills. I had an incredibly torrid time finding relevant case laws during internships and my academic writing work wasn't great as all my draft manuscripts at decent journals got rejected multiple times. Strangely I was decent in academics -with a 9/9/7 profile. I had an inkling during college that this career won't work out but never thought I'd go jobless for a year.

Now I'm 25 and realize I don't have many options or lots of time. I’ve been researching possible careers but still feel lost. Risk management seems like an interesting option, particularly in compliance, AML, and regulatory risk, but I have no finance or compliance background. I’m unsure if I should pursue certifications like FRM or CAMS or just look for entry-level roles. Legal tech and AI-related roles also seem promising, especially in compliance automation and contract analysis, but I don’t know the road map to land a job in this field. I’ve also considered preparing for regulatory body legal officer exams (SEBI, RBI, etc.), but given my career gap and lack of work experience, I don’t know if it’s realistic, especially since I wouldn’t be preparing full-time.

At this point, I just want a stable career that pays atleast 35k monthly, and I’m willing to start from scratch. Any advice would be appreciated. I even had to unmatch people on dating apps whom I was having a decent conversation with because I felt too insecure about my future and not being able to afford dates and remaining jobless😅

Any guidance would be appreciated. Thanks in advance !

It is a well-written article. A little amusing to see Gujaratis owning the stereotype of being money-minded with such gusto (in good spirit, of course). Also nice to read an article where everyone, for once, is enjoying themselves instead of the usual horrible crimes that one comes across daily in news.

NLS is a UG focused state university. Their bread and butter are the UG-programmes. Even their Master's programmes are secondary, let alone the doctoral programme. It lacks the research culture. Just because a teacher teaches well (and gets good ratings by students for teaching), doesn't mean they are good PhD supervisors. Tread carefully and avoid NLS for PhD.

Last year, some associates had gone to the owner of a Lala firm in Delhi and cited government advisories asking people not to travel in the hot sun unless necessary. Lalaji laughed at them and asked them to buy a car and travel to office, instead of using autos and metro. He also said they are young men and their bodies can cope with hardship. Then one of the associates asked if they could come twice a week and do the rest from home, citing the example of Lalaji himself. Lalaji flew into a rage, used BC-MC gaali, and asked how dare the associates compare themselves with him. He said he would fire them if he heard one more word.

Incidentally, this Lalaji is one of the many Lalajis lobbying against the entry of foreign law firms through a certain organisation. 😃

According to Down to Earth magazine, published by CSE, India will become UNINHABITABLE for humans by 2035 because of extreme heat. We will become like the Sahara desert.

https://www.downtoearth.org.in/amp/story/climate-change/will-india-be-uninhabitable-by-2035

I am a final year law student who joined judiciary coaching and paid hefty amount for that and now there are speculation that they might add three year experience. I am just so done with the unpredictable approach of Supreme Court. This will be injustice to the people who are already preparing and have invested their money and time into this journey. Ughhhh

On this note, sharing this absolutely gem of a piece << https://www.nplusonemag.com/issue-26/politics/rhodocycles/ >> by the wonderful Nakul Krishna, a Rhodes scholar himself (and a most deserving one too, in my opinion) and one who was certainly not born with a silver spoon. It is such a lovely article where he reflects on his own positionality within elite institutions where intellectual originality and provocation are admired only in well-choreographed social events but not when turned into spirited acts of social and institutional defiance.

I would agree with that as well even though historically it has always been difficult to stop the rich from getting what they want. That is the one good thing about wars; for once, the rich are a fair game! Jokes aside, fellowship organisations themselves benefit from their association with the rich and the influential. In a way, their promise of excellence and upward social mobility is intimately tied with maintaining the status quo.

Firstly I don't speak Tamil, neither am I from south india.

It's not about competence in imposing that's besides the point. The recent outrage has a context which will require you to read the history. The following statement of yours does not show that you are appreciating the current events in the proper context.

"Hooligans aside, it has not been imposed by anyone on anyone."

Read the history. The hate is a reaction, to the present imposition and the past imposition. The past imposition failed cause of resistance. This one will fail too.

There is no need to impose any language or culture on one another. Let people choose. If they want to learn another language or get familiar or practice another culture so he it. However, it should be a free choice. Hate will beget hate. Imposition will only divide us. Funnily they want to "link" us.

According to page 9 of the brochure << https://www.iitkgp.ac.in/assets/pdf/phd_brochure.pdf >>, it appears that those who have completed a one-year LLM are not eligible to apply. Sorry if it affects your plans. It is certainly not fair to discriminate against one category of applicants like this. Having said that, the phrase "A degree equivalent to any of the above" on the same page in a list of applicable degrees that includes the two-year LLM should, in theory, also apply to one-year LLM programmes since both the one-year and the two-year are, in fact, equivalent, but it could also be a case of bad drafting and IIT Kharagpur may not agree if we ask them that.

Then why do they falsely advertise the number of vacancies that they do not intend to fill in the first place? They should only advertise 1 or 2 seats if that is all they are looking to fill instead of making applicants sit through a complex admission process spanning months with long, essay-style exams, followed by even longer interviews, only to end up rejecting them because of factors that have nothing to do with an applicant's performance.

I needed guidance, as in I wanted to choose between capital markets and securities litigation. I'm a 4th year law student from private university Mumbai, My CV is centric to both practice area that is around 4 month of internship experience in each (IN fairly recognized law firms). I have also experience in B&F and M&A.

Please Help me Seniors.....
Any other things that I should know, please lmk.

You cannot have a coherent national identity when every decision is reduced to it job-related utility. It is ridiculous to argue against Hindi while arguing for English in the same breath. Why the false distinction? More people speak Hindi than English and yet you would rather prefer to learn English, a language which is anyway spoken by a small minority and is completely divorced from cultural traditions of all Indians. Why? Because it makes access to employment easier? So you are willing to sacrifice your own cultural identity just so that you can have a slightly easier life? I don't blame you for thinking like this. It actually proves my point that the single, greatest reason for why Indian languages are struggling is because their own speakers consider them irrelevant.

It upsets you that there are regions in the country with greater population than yours and who are comfortable in speaking a single language and its associated dialects. But that is no reason to accuse them of imposing themselves upon you. It is a historical fact that the freedom struggle was primarily led by people in the central and northern Indian subcontinent while the political and economic elites in peninsular region were happy to piggyback on their coat-tails to achieve domination in their provinces. The region of Bengal has contributed immensely to freedom struggle but even they lack the kind of hatred that Tamil Nadu and its elite have against Hindi without reason. Even then, no one has forced Hindi on you. But it seems that you just want every Hindi speaker to abdicate their own culture and language just because you have already done so with yours. That is not a fair expectation. This is one nation and that does not mean that it should only have one language. Not at all. But it also does not mean linguistic identity should be used (like it is being used in TN) to divide national identity by putting people into these mutually exclusive silos. The state of Tamil Nadu is singular in its hostility to a single language today. The evidence for Hindi imposition is mostly anecdotal and consists of no more than a few errant public sector employees or a few uncharitable private folks who are always looking for a fight on any issue, including language. That is what gets picked up on news and over internet. A large majority is simply trying to make an honest living. Sometimes there can be misunderstandings over language but that is no reason to judge and condemn an entire community of its speakers. Learn whichever language you want. But stop distrusting your fellow man just because he has recently migrated to your neighborhood and cannot speak in your tongue.

Sure. But we dont make their marks public, do we? The equivalent of giving a student a bad grade is giving a teacher a bad evaluation by following internal processes, not internet shaming.

Besides that, I honestly dont think students are qualified to judge teachers. They dont know the subject, all they can judge is whether they like the person and whether they find class entertaining and fun. Most indian students wouldnt know rigor if it hit them in the face. and studies demonstrate huge biases in how different kinds of teachers are evaluated in student feedback. You want to evaluate teachers? Thats what VCs and deans are for! do spot evaluations, come sit in my classroom and tell me what im doing right and wrong, thats what universities abroad rely on to make tenure decisions.

We dont internet shame students because we allow for students to grow and change and learn and be human. Not so for professors, not so for vice chancellors, every single flaw is picked apart like you're not there to teach them but you're a contestant on indian idol and they're all the mean judge.

If internet shaming is in play- surely it should be in play for everyone. Let's have a purge and see who survives.

I'm making a rhetorical point—teachers won't do it even when their students say and write and behave horribly because teachers are more mature and professional than that. Its a shame that students these days aren't parented or even expected to behave professionally at all. Universities die by doing this. Infantilise your students and treat your teachers like liabilities, and you'll have a bunch of whiny babies and high attrition rates.