Scotiabank iTrade RESP … they are sneaky little buggers with their hidden fees.

Watch out if you are considering opening a Scotiabank iTrade RESP account.  I got the email below from Scotiabank where I currently have a very minimal RESP account.  I’d opened this account with the intention of increasing it, assuming I’d eventually have the funds to do so, but will now likely close it out of principle and look elsewhere:

“As a valued Scotia iTRADE® client, your continued satisfaction is important to us.
That’s why we’re writing to you today to remind you that your combined assets with Scotia iTRADE need to reach certain levels as of August 31st, 2012 for you to avoid an annual fee charged to your registered account(s) on September 15th, 2012 (covering a one year period to September 14th, 2013).
Here is the breakdown for meeting asset levels to avoid the fee:
• If you hold an RESP account with Scotia iTRADE, you need to have $15,000 or greater in combined assets with Scotia iTRADE to avoid a $25 annual fee (plus HST) charged to your RESP account(s) on September 15th.
• For registered accounts, other than RESP accounts, you need to have $25,000 or greater in combined assets with Scotia iTRADE to avoid a $100 annual fee (plus HST) charged to your registered account(s) on September 15th.
With our powerful trading platforms, easy-to-use trading and investment tools, and friendly customer service, consolidating more of your assets with Scotia iTRADE is a wise decision.
We appreciate your business and will continue to offer you robust investment solutions to help you achieve your investment needs.”

Somewhere in the fine print of the Scotia iTrade agreement must be some statement of fees for less than this minimum “$15,000″.  When I read the fine print, I saw the fees schedule for the per trade fees, but not this one.

I can summarize this email from Scotiabank, “As a valued iTrade customer, we will charge you fees that will encourage you to look into our competitors banking products.”

IntellectualArchive.com has promoted my engineering bachelors degree to a doctorate

Here’s an amusing consequence of the SR paper I posted to arxiv on change of basis (I’d intended to try to see if this was publication worthy, but forgot about it).

I don’t have any intention of paying for publication, when the publisher offers no peer review, nor any mention that basic editing services would be provided. I’d be curious if you’d be able to write something that was complete garbage and have this publisher print it.

Your research: Change of basis and Gram-Schmidt orthonormalization in special relativity



 May 29, 2012 5:02 PMAdmin@IntellectualArchive.comActions
To:
 peeter.joot@utoronto.ca 
Dear Dr. Joot, 

We have found your research on arXiv.org and we were very impressed with your work.  

If your article "Change of basis and Gram-Schmidt orthonormalization in special relativity" has not yet been printed OR if you have another unpublished article of the same quality, then we would be happy to include it into May issue of the "Intellectual Archive" journal, which will be printed and distributed in June of 2012. 

In addition to the free "Intellectual Archive Bulletin", which contains abstracts for all the works submitted the previous month to our website www.IntellectualArchive.com, we also print and distribute the monthly "Intellectual Archive" journal. This journal includes FULL-TEXT ARTICLES in Astronomy, Physics, Mathematics, Biology, and Computer Science, and is distributed to major scientific libraries across Canada and the US. 

The printing and distribution of the journal, with full-text articles, is not free. However, it is offered at a reasonable cost at only $19.99 for articles of fewer than 20 pages.

If your article, "Change of basis and Gram-Schmidt orthonormalization in special relativity", has not yet been printed (OR if you have another unpublished article of yours) and you want to publish it in the "Intellectual Archive" journal, then you may submit it for publication by visiting the web page http://IntellectualArchive.com/?link=journal . 

Please note, we do NOT require the exclusive copyright transfer for inclusion of your paper in the "Intellectual Archive" journal, which means that in addition to archiving and printing your article with us, you may still submit your article to any other online or offline publisher.

The deadline for the inclusion of your article into the "Intellectual Archive" journal is June 01, 2012. Please do not wait until the last moment to submit your article, due to limited space and other potentially unforeseeable reasons. 

If you need more information or if you have any questions regarding IntellectualArchive.com, please do not hesitate to contact us at your earliest convenience.

Thank you,

Mark Raynus
Editor of "Intellectual Archive"


P.S. Here are the some important libraries to which the "Intellectual Archive" journal will be distributed. 

The Library of Congress, USA

Harvard University Library, USA

Science Library, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA

Moffitt Library, University of California, Berkeley, USA

The Boston Public Library, USA

New York Public Library, USA

National Library of Canada, Canada

McGill University Library, Montreal, Canada

University of British Columbia Library,  Canada

Robarts Library, University of Toronto, Canada

Toronto Public Library, Canada



If you do not want to receive e-mail from us in the future - please reply with the subject line "No emails". Thanks!

On instant messaging in the work place.

When I started at IBM way too many years ago, there were three main forms of development communication:

• email
• phone
• office drop by

Now there’s one more in the list, the ‘instant message’.  We have a homegrown system called sametime, but it doesn’t differ significantly from any of the other well known chat systems like Windows Live Messenger or even facebook.

I personally find this sort of chat system very intrusive, and have converged on a protocol that is acceptable to me for dealing with them.

• I don’t expect anybody else to answer in real time, and do not attempt to respond myself to any such message in real time.  It is rare that I’ll  wait around hovering over my keyboard while I see “XXX is typing”, so that I can reply, and don’t expect this of anybody else either.  When or if I happen to notice the message, and if the time is convenient, I’ll look at it.
• If I don’t answer, I expect that the sender will follow up in email if required.
• If the message request says something without any technical content, like “hi”, “hello”, and so forth, I generally close it without response.
• After sending any message to anybody else, I close my chat window.  If they choose to answer it at some point, then it reappears with their response.

With many people working remotely these days, the instant messaging system does often work better than a phone call, and it is great for sharing text with less delay than email, but I think it is generally unrealistic to expect any sort of interactive response in the workplace when using such a chat system, because you have no idea what else the person at the other end is doing.

 

Emails with code review requests.

We have email distribution lists for various code components in our product and requests for review end up being sent to these lists.

Twice this week I’ve sent emails in response to code reviews along the lines of:

“Please re-send your request with enough information to give the potential reviewer a clue what they should be looking at.”

It does not appear obvious to some people to do this. Our distribution lists is serviced by a number of possible people, with one person selected as the “victim of the week” to own answering the email and/or doing whatever defect work ends up generated by that email if any.

For review requests, it may be that somebody who knows the code better than the person monitoring the list for the week can review, but if you don’t describe the change in more detail then that possible “better reviewer” would never know to look.

Leaving half the work to the reader of the email that can be easily justified in a number of circumstances. However, if your email is distributed, then an attempt to save a bit of time in drafting it, means that all the readers incur the costs. The cost of email servicing can really add up, so make them count.

A review request should include the following

• Defect # and abstract if appropriate.
• High level description of what’s being changed, and why.
• Filenames and function names of what is being changed. If this is a lot then details can be provided outside of the email.
• Context diffs (for example those generated by (gnu) ‘diff -p -U10′. Many people have preferences on how they compare files, so also provide the new and original versions of the files. Do not attach these to the email, but include a path to where these are available.
• Instead of providing copies of the files, it may make sense to provide information about the version control sandbox that contains the files. Do this in an effective way ((*) see below).

(*) Perhaps unique to clearcase, there can be bad ways to share information about your changes. It is common for people to share the clearcase branch name that they’ve used. Also provide the viewname (if that view is accessible to your reviewer), and the config spec (assuming your view is not accessible to the reviewer). What your changed files are branched from many not be obvious, and these may not even be visible to the reviewer in their view, if a specific version of the directory element is required for the file to be visible (i.e.: when you have created a new file).

Ontario government accessibility education module.

I’ve just completed the Ontario government accessibility education module that’s mandatory for all IBM employees. Ironically, it is delivered in what seems like a condescending fashion, stating many things that seem obvious.

To demonstrate this, consider the inverse of some of these points:

• Assume the individual can’t see you.
• Assume what a person can or cannot do.
• Be inflexible.
• Disrespect personal space.
• Do not be confident and never reassure.
• Do not speak directly to your customer.
• Do not take the time to get to know your customer’s needs.
• Exercise impatience.
• Help before you ask.
• If you’re giving directions or providing any information, be imprecise and undescriptive.
• Interrupt or finish your customer’s sentences.
• Lean over them and on any assistive devices.
• Leave the individual in awkward, dangerous or undignified positions.
• Leave your customer in the middle of a room.
• Make sure your customer does not understand what you’ve said.
• Move items, such as canes and walkers, out of the person’s reach.
• Provide information in a way that does not work for your customer.
• Shout.
• Use obscure and incomprehensible language.
• Walk away without saying good-bye.

I think that many of the people who actually need many of the tips given aren’t going to be helped at all by them since this likely indicates a  failure to observe their environment.

That said, I think I still did learn some things from the education.  One is that most people that are legally blind are not fully blind.  I also admit that I don’t understand all of the points.  For example, if I encountered somebody with a deafblind impairment who was accompanied by an “Intervenor”, I would guess that I’d address my communication at the Intervenor because I could communicate with that individual.  Perhaps that point was meant only for Intervenors for less severe communication issues, such as communication with somebody deaf accompanied by somebody who signs for them?

I’d also guess that the tendency to want to help causes many people to violate the “Ask before you help” point without them even realizing it, but if the individual doesn’t mention it when it happens, being told to ask first is probably not enough.  That must be frustrating to an involuntarily “helped” individual.

Portions of a (yet unsent) letter to my brother who has foolishly joined the marines. Perhaps too strong?

[snip]

I know that we’ll never likely agree about the validity of military service. I’m not about to pretend that I don’t find US foreign policy terroristic (and there’s a massive irony to that), but you are still my brother, and I care for you. As I see it you are now stuck in your service role, having contracted to do so. I also realize that this was your choice, so you must believe you are being given the opportunity to do good. I view that as a remarkably successfully marketing job by the recruiters, and not one that matches reality. Hopefully you will actually have an opportunity to do some good, but I don’t have optimistic hopes that militaristic action ever creates such opportunities.

As I’ve said before, I worry about the physical dangers of your choice, and the emotional ones. You’ll have to survive both being the target of massive hatred, against all those that the US has imposed their will and imperialistic tendencies against. You’ll also likely have to deal with the inevitable mental and emotional strain of killing other human beings, in particular innocent civilians or those that feel wronged by the invasions imposed upon them. You’ve told me that regulations prohibit you from discussing your opinions on US policies, or even sharing your rational for joining the Marines. That is, until your service is complete. I truly don’t know what led you to make the decisions you did. But that isn’t going to change now, so you’ll have to make the best of it. I hope for your sake that you are left in a position that does not put you in a position to be killed or to have to kill others.

Last time we talked you said you were due to be posted to a new service location. Has that now happened? I hope that you ended up with the embassy guarding job that had been described to you. Did it end up being in Spain, as theorized? I hope so, since that should be a relatively peaceful and uneventful location to serve. Once that guarding tour is over, are you back to the USA before the next deployment?

[snip]

This letter was written in a stream of consciousness fashion, and I’ve sprouted just about anything that came to my head without inhibition. Hopefully, this won’t cause any damage. I don’t want to end up estranged from you, in a damaged relationship, like you and Dad. I’m hoping that you can both start communicating again too, as hard as this may be for both of you. If you are both completely honest with each other, you’ll have an opportunity to deal with whatever resentments may be sitting there keeping you both apart. Fixing this can only be done with communication. Repairing your relationship will probably require that you somehow explain your choices to Dad. He doesn’t understand why you’ve chosen the military any better than I do. If you open your soul and explain all your motivations, even if they are simple ones (like wanting to have some independence and make your own decisions), then you can fix the relationship. Otherwise it will fall to pieces and continue in that direction. You’ll have to make yourself understood, because I doubt very much that Dad understands why you have made your choices (I’ve known you twice as long and can’t understand why you’d choose to be a Marine). I’d like to understand you too, but for that to happen, you’ll also have to understand me, which is why I’ve been brutally honest here. It is honesty that is based on love and confusion.

With all my heart, I love you [redacted]. I hope that you’ll not be offended by my honesty, and that you’ll write back. I also hope that you overcome all odds and prosper in your role as a Marine, and do get a chance to do some good.

–
ps. I’m still amused by your revelation that there are regulations against getting sunburnt out of service (destruction of government property), and also regulations against non-missionary style sex in the Marines. What happens to somebody that gets caught getting a sunburn on their back because they are doing it doggy style for too long in the hot sun?

Just Energy. Attempts to silence bloggers with legal action.

I’d posted some of my thoughts about Just Energy Canada, after being thoroughly unimpressed with what seemed to me extremely unethical and coercive tactics.

I’d had a couple comments on that post by an individual that turned out to be the key to getting the contract cancelled (a contract renewal that I didn’t know I had, and had never received a copy of, nor any confirmation of renewal). That individual says he is now being threatened with legal action by this company, and has asked for his posts to be removed. Since I was aided by what he had to say, and the links that had been provided, I think that these comments are worthy of being retained, so I’m now re-posting them anonymously for all to see.  They are now deleted from the comments in my original blog post.

You didnt have to pay them if you moved to a new location where the company doesn’t service or you moved to a location where you are NOT responsible for paying your utility (your name is not on the utility bills).

They don’t tell you this and send you straight to collection because it’s easy $450. Same thing happened with my relative, they sold their home, they moved to a small apartment. They no longer responsible for their utility, their landlord was. They paid $600 to Universal Energy (now Just Energy) for cancellation. That’s why the company is doing this, easy money with uninformed customers.

I would send a complaint letter to the local government regulator, tell them your story. If you don’t complaint, no one would know, the government regulator can’t keep track of the trend if no one complaint and no one will know what kind of company Just Energy really is.

Read more about how to cancel Just Energy, and you don’t have to pay a cent. Also here is a list of local government energy regulators to file your complaint, please file your complaint so your friends, family and neighbors do not have to waste time with this garbage.

My response to this was:

Thanks for the tips (I can’t take advantage of the non-proximity tip since I still live close to my old house and continue to be serviced by Enbridge gas).

I will definitely send a complaint letter to the Ontario Energy Board. I’ve informed just energy that I intend to do so.

Imagine an honest version of the Just Energy door to door salesman:

“
- Sign up with us, and you’ll never receive any information letting you know if you are actually saving money, or even breaking even.
- Should you move, despite your old gas bill being paid in full, and the account closed, we will then send collection agencies after you for exorbitant contract breaking fees.
- We won’t attempt to supply you with any information saying that there is a contractual obligation to continue using our company as a distributor. We prefer to send collection agencies first.
- Our company is inept. Should you have a contract dispute, we will take a month and a half to mail you a copy of the contract so that you can verify that there was in fact a legally binding agreement.
- We also cannot email documents in less than two weeks, and have to be called repeatedly to attempt to get us to do so. We will also initially deny that we can even email documentation. We will loose requests to surface mail it, so you’ll have to call us many times, and spend hours on the phone with us.
- Should you separate with your spouse, we will add to your grief. We don’t know anything about compassion, and at a time when you already have enough stress, we consider it our job to add to it. Instead of cancelling a contract associated with a pre-marital home we require one of the former spousal partners to assume contract associated with a house that neither party even lives in anymore.
- Should you actually insist on terminating the distribution agreement, we will then let you know that a variable rate agreement is possible. Of course we prefer to price gouge at inflated fixed rates, so this will not be advertised or made known, except as a last resort to keep collecting money from you.
“

He also wrote:

I was browsing your homepage and all I can see are calculations and equations. Then all of sudden there is a single post on top about Just Energy. You really hate these guys and I can’t blame you, there are many good reasons to hate Just Energy.

Yup, if they start to be upfront with homeowners, they won’t be where they are today, $2 billion cooperation. They understand not a lot of folks know about regulation on gas and electricity and that is what they are taking advantage of. Misinformed people and you’re absolutely right, Just Energy doesn’t care about their customers.

Just last year they changed their name to Just Energy, before that it was Ontario Energy Savings, Alberta Energy Savings and down the states it was US Energy Savings.

Ontario Energy Board? Ontario Energy Savings? Which one is a private company and which one is a real government body? Even the name is a scam, and who approved this? Hmmm…

Their former names imply some kind of government affiliation and the name Energy Savings imply savings, but that’s not true.

The only time Just Energy will contact you is through the (misleading) door-to-door sale about “energy savings” and then the follow up call to reaffirm over the phone after 10 days. After that you won’t ever hear from them again. No thank you package for joining, no mail telling you any information and when you move go talk to their collection. Gee I wonder why people hate them.

Just look at their own website, I think its Justenergy.com and you won’t find any information about the rates and different prices comparing their rates vs the local utility. After all, gas and electricity are their main products. The company argues it is so hard for them because gas and electricity prices change every day. That’s true but why are there other providers selling the exact same thing with their rates on their websit?

Oh I can go on and on …

To which I said

Changing names quickly is another form of misdirection. The company probably builds up negative feedback and routinely changes names to help minimize the damage.

I wouldn’t say that I hate them, but I do hate having been dumb enough to have been exploited by them. Having had that happen, I’ll not hesitate to make my story available. Perhaps I can help at least one other person avoid the same thing.

As you pointed out my single rogue post on this company along with the rest of my math and physics and computer programming obscurity will likely go unnoticed.

My off the cuff remark about the company changing names periodically is speculation. I don’t know if this has actually happened.

Some thoughts and questions about new plans for CIA actions in Yemen.

The undeclared US war on Yemen started with the pretense of liberating the country from a tyrannical dictator. Deja-vu
anybody? Sounds like Iraq all over again.

My immediate question upon hearing this, is wondering who has been financing this dictator and supplying weapons to his armies and police forces. Given the geography I’m sure oil revenue is part of it, but I’d not be the least surprised if US provided weapons and weapons training had also been involved, nor would I be surprised if US money was also tossed into the pot.

It also seems to me that the military-industrial-political complex of the US appears to always drive at least one overt active war with at least one country at any given time. What was the longest interval in the last 60 years that the US was not actively running some sort of war campaign?

With congressional pressure to end the Yemen bombings that have gone on longer than the 60 day maximum time interval allowed by US law without an explicit declaration of war (and congressional financing thereof) we now hear that the CIA will continue the mantle of Yemen bombings under the guise of Al-Queda and counter terrorist efforts. This seems to me a direct confirmation that the initial bombing in Yemen under the guise of eliminating a dictator, was nothing more than an excuse. With the Afgan and Iraq wars both unsuccessful and unpopular (unless military spending is the metric for success), Yemen’s leadership provided a good excuse for another war. However, since it is an undeclared war, it looks like it now has to go covert to be maintained.

It amazes me how the political and media puppets of the military industry can convince enough people that violent action against believed terrorists has any benefit. It certainly has benefit to weapons manufacturers and other war profiteers, since this violent action creates both the both the US terrorism and the stereotypical terrorism that they require to continue their business.

EDIT: foot in mouth
I need a serious geography lesson. I can’t keep the US wars straight in my mind, and appear to have gotten Yemen mixed up with Libya. Yemen sounds like it’s just a covert war right now, whereas Libya is the one that is being waged without congressional approval. To add to the confusion is the talk that Syria is the next US war.

openyale now has a Shankar course on E&M and QM

openyale now has a Shankar course on E&M and QM.

His humor kicks in right away. Right off the top, “The good news is that you need QM only to study very tiny things … Do you need QM to describe the human brain? The answer is, yes, if it is small enough. I’ve gone to parties where after a few minutes of talking to a person I’m thinking this person’s brain needs a fully quantum mechanical treatment”.

Magnetic monopole discovery at the local dollar store was a fraud.

The dollar store has available little plaster moulding kits for the kids to make little dinosaurs.  According to the instructions, these are supposed to have included one sided magnets.  Sadly, they are perfectly regular two sided magnets, and the search for Dirac’s monopoles must still continue

 

“Remember that the magnets only work on one side so before placing into the mixture make sure that the magnetic side is facing upwards.”