Litigiousness

In our politically charged environment when anyone who opposes a popular or, depending on your ideology, the morally correct opinion, it is pleasant to be occasionally reminded that law and governance, however impersonal, are still objective arenas of discourse. It's true that we're overly litigious, however. Briefly: A man sentenced to 10 years for DWI and vehicular manslaughter was sued by the victim's family. Not satisfied with a sentence that probably wouldn't go lower than five years with good behavior, they wanted damages. He counter-sued and claimed their teenage son's disobedience of bicycle helmet laws contributed to his death and his own jail sentence. Some in the media portrayed his suit as morbid but I believed it illustrated the neutered way in which society takes the little things that make up life and puts them under a magnifying glass whenever we get our panties in a bunch. The civil suit against OJ was bad enough but he was a free man and still had plenty of money--this guy wasn't going to be earning much money in prison. His suit put the absurdity of the lawsuit into the open and transformed the public's perception of grieving parents seeking justice to vengeful parents seeking a paycheck.

The panel on the use of the Kindle was more genial but reminded me of this case nonetheless. The first presenter walked the audience into their mind-set that the device was simply being tested, rather than mandated, and having no blind students, they could not violate the Americans with Disabilities Act. Quite intentionally the coming lawsuit seemed asinine. Another example of overly litigious citizens using the state to lower standards to the commonest denominators to disadvantage the majority of Americans who have fully functioning eyes. But after another speaker described "print disabled" persons and attempts to ensure that these persons are not left out of the discussions which develop these paperless technologies and mandate accessibility, the frivolous lawsuit took on important symbolic meanings intended to increase awareness. Perhaps I run the risk of seeming prejudiced when I say that people with untreatable mental disorders that keep them from learning effectively without outside assistance should probably not go to college in the first place. People who are deaf or blind or have reduced use of their limbs can and should be reasonably accommodated--but only if their disabilities demonstratively limit their talent. Stephen Hawking stands out as an extreme example: A Brilliant mind trapped inside a nearly lifeless shell. Many persons suffering from retardation are given High School diplomas as more of a gesture but potential employers realize this. High School is no longer a "Secondary School" that only the most well off Americans completed but rather an assumed minimum educational qualification and it doesn't behoove America well to turn college into the new gold standard. This is not Harrison Bergeron.

The second video, save for discussions of the ways libraries can be more attractive to students with a coffeeshop like atmosphere, was much less stimulating. The southern woman's accent was one of the strongest I've heard from an obviously intelligent person. My experience has been that the strongest accents have the worst grammar and thus perpetuate the image of the ignorant southerner. This sort of spoils things for proud southerners who freely use "y'all", and English would benefit from a second-person plural, but refrain from double-negatives. Her frequent interruptions of other speakers irked me but she usually contributed to thoughtful discussion so she came out ahead--as far as I'm concerned.

It is a cliche but still no less true that libraries must re-invent themselves as their users change. I recall an anecdote of a campus which mandated laptops and, because the library did nothing to provide services and instruction to fit this new paradigm, eventually dissolved the library. While I prefer an actual coffee-house to a hybrid library, many of my peers don't and I recognize this must be exploited. This will become especially important as generations of children are given handmedown PCs and laptops and lose the physicality which gave birth to the terms "file" or "cut and paste."

The audience input was also quite fascinating. Not being a tech person I failed to understand, at least at first, why Google wouldn't want metadata for more complete and accurate searching. From my understanding of the subsequent discussion, the fault with Google's search mechanisms which allows Google Bombing would be exacerbated if they accepted metadata.

After these videos, however, I kind of want a Kindle for PDFs. Unlike most of my peers I don't print them but I don't like to carry my laptop everywhere. It's a heavy mofo and has destroyed two of the three zipper compartments in my expensive leather messenger bag. I still have no idea how much repairs might be... perhaps I should sue?