One thing that never ceases to annoy me are the flyers that street-spammers stuff into my mailbox. Unlike the email spammers (typically penis enlargement pills and other fake pharmaceuticals) and telejunkers (usually for quasi-charities, duct cleaning and windows) it seems that mailbox spam is not limited to hawking one particular thing.

Tonight, I get home from work to find a religious flyer in my mailbox. I won't mention the faith in question, because (a) it's largely irrelevant and (b) I don't wish to incite hatred by labeling one particular faith as more spammy than another.

The contents of the flyer itself are not worth commenting on - I didn't even waste any time reading it, but what is laughable is the one-liner at the top of the flyer that caught my eye: "Note: This publication uses the Holy Scriptures; discard it with the proper care". Of course I'll discard it with the proper care - it's on plain paper, so it went quite nicely straight into the recycling bin. What did they want me to do with it? Bury it? Cremate it? Mail it back?

The right tool for the right job: Windows for desktops, *nix for servers. I'm sure some *nix fanboys would disagree, but let's face it, despite the world-wide contempt for the behemoth that is Microsoft - its questionable business ethics and abuse of monopoly - Linux is never going to get a foothold in the desktop-of-choice market unless things work "out-of-the-box".

Here's an example: I'd consider myself fairly tech savvy - I code in multiple languages across multiple platforms. I've tried OpenBSD and NetBSD - my preference is still FreeBSD; tried various flavours of Linux - SUSE was sh*t (never got past the installer: it switched off the VGA card) and RedHat wasn't bad.

Bombarded with even more telejunk calls than ever, I recently decided to purchase an Asterisk PBX system from Digium. I ordered my TDM11B (a TDM400P, 1 FXS Module and 1 FXO Module) on a Sunday afternoon, Digium shipped it the next day and I received it the morning after that - very impressive! My only gripe: the FXS module required a spare 12v power cable, which didn't reach across without considerable effort/re-jigging. I put my concerns into email and 7 hours later, Digium CS acknowledged my suggestion of including one in their retail starter packs. Perhaps I've become desensitised to bad ecommerce customer service over the years - my last internet purchase before this one was from geeks.com and it took them 3 days to ship my order, plus another 2 weeks to receive it via the USPS (without any tracking numbers to check the progress). The online "purchase" before that was this sorry episode over a year ago. So, all in all, Digium exceeded my expectations. Anyway, I digress...

Although Asterisk is supposed to work on multiple *nix platforms, it's officially supported on Linux. So, I downloaded and burned the 5 Fedora C6 ISO's from Red Hat. Attempted a full install on a spare hobby server (IBM PL300, 600MHz P3, 128MB RAM, 10GB HD). Installer craps out halfway through with kryptic error messages. Tried again with a minimal install (no X windows). Success. Fedora Core 6 does not recognise my TDM400P at boot up. So then I download and burn ASTLinux. It works, but is so bare bones, I can't do anything like download and compile Pico/Nano. So I download and burn the AsteriskNOW LiveCD ISO from Digium. Boots up fine - recognises my TDM400P, but PC locks up when it gets to the main menu. So I download and burn the AsteriskNOW installation disc. 8 CD's later, it figures that the last thing I try works 100%! Some custom Linux distro called "rPath Linux". I have Asterisk up and running within 20 mins of using the config web interface.

I have an idea about how to expand the functionality. Actually, someone else had the idea before me, hence a successful search on Google for "Asterisk talking caller ID". I download and install Festival, an open source text-to-speech engine. Doesn't work, but doesn't give me any error messages - just no audio. Should've realised that audio support, despite using relatively old hardware, would be a challenge.

The rPath kernel recognises both the onboard (ESS Maestro3) and SB Live (PCI) soundcards, but there's no /dev/dsp or /dev/audio or anything that remotely looks like a sound device. So I waste a whole day (no exaggeration) visiting the ALSA website, downloading and trying to install the drivers for the Maestro3 and SB Live (AKA emu10k/emu10k1) cards. Running "./configure" works; running "make clean" appears to work; running "make install" returns dumb error messages, such as "cp: cannot stat `snd-page-alloc.ko': No such file or directory". Seems like ALSA is the only source for Linux audio drivers, yet their bull$hit configure script doesn't "make" the .ko files needed to copy to the modules directory. I can't even RPM them in, as rPath doesn't support that package manager.

Well, at least my Asterisk is working - just need to work on the config to send telejunkers to the "Torture Menus". Googling around, it appears that Asterisk works on FreeBSD, but now that I've finally got it working, I don't want to change back to FreeBSD - besides, the support appears to better for Asterisk on the Linux platform.

I'm a coffee drinker. I don't smoke, drink (much!) or gamble, so you could say that coffee and computers are my vices. Even better, the two aren't simultaneously mutually exclusive!

Breakfast isn't breakfast without coffee. Being a convenience junkie, I grab a coffee and a doughtnut or breakfast sandwich from Timmy's on my way to work. According to the Roll Up The Rim To Win website, this "contest" runs from February 26th while cup supplies last. The odds are apparently 1-in-9 (one in nine) of winning. Of course, that's 1-in-9 of winning something, be it a free coffee, doughnut, muffin, iPod, plasma TV or car. The odds of 1:9 are published in the "'Contest' Rules & Regulations" .PDF file on the website, which states: "the overall approximate odds across North America of being eligible to win one of the Thirty (30) 2007 Toyota Camry Hybrid B Packages are one (1) in 9,007,900; the overall approximate odds of being eligible to win one of the One Hundred (100) Panasonic 42" Plasma Televisions are one (1) in 2,702,370; the overall approximate odds of being eligible to win one (1) of Five Hundred (500) cash prizes of $1,000.00 are one in 540,474; the overall approximate odds of being eligible to win one of Ten Thousand (10,000) Apple iPod nano digital music players are one (1) in 27,024; the overall approximate odds of being eligible to win a food prize are one (1) in 9. In the U.S.A., the estimated odds of being eligible to win the 2007 Toyota Camry Hybrid B Package are one (1) in 11,359,000. NOTE: The odds of obtaining an eligible "winning" RIM TAB will vary by region based on cup distribution outlined above and will change throughout the contest as specially marked contest cups are distributed and sold in each Region. The total number of prizes available to be won will decrease throughout the contest as contest cups are distributed and prizes are claimed."

So, there you have it, in black and white. There is also a table of regions, showing that region 3 (Ontario) has a larger allocation of winning cups - most probably because Ontario is the most populous province.

Now, consider the following:

(1) I live in Ontario.
(2) I work 5 days a week, although it seems like more sometimes. Anyway, the point is, I don't generally buy a Tim Hortons coffee on the weekends.
(3) There are 13 (thirteen) working days between February 26th and March 14th inclusive.
(4) Between the coffee I buy for myself and for colleagues (who reciprocally buy me one) I have averaged between 2 and 3 coffees (medium to x-large sizes, no smalls) per working day. Let's be generous and say 2.5, no rounding up.
(5) That means that I have consumed at least 33 coffees since the "contest" began.
(6) As of March 14th, I have won: no coffees, no doughnuts, no muffins, no iPods (wouldn't want an i$hit anyway, but that's not the point) or plasma TV's or cars.

So, Tim Hortons, your Roll Up The Rim To Win "contest" is a crock. Seems the "rim" refers to something else, not a coffee cup.

Related link here.

Whilst Googling around today, I noticed a sponsored link...

Linux vs. Windows
Which do you choose when
reliability is key? Get the facts.
www.microsoft.ca/getthefacts

.... which redirects to this site. Allegedly, "an overwhelming 88% of corporations report that Microsoft's Windows Server 2003 operating system provides performance and reliability that are equal to or better than Linux in comparable usage scenarios".

Reading on, "corporate enterprises rate Windows security nearly on par with comparable Linux networks".

Nearly on par does not equal on par. These stupid assertions were made nearly 2 years ago, since this article is dated April 2005.

Microsoft, if you're going to dabble in negative campaigning, at least keep it fresh.

One thing that never ceases to annoy me are the flyers that spammers stuff into my mailbox. Unlike the email spammers (typically penis enlargement pills and other fake pharmaceuticals) and telejunkers (usually duct cleaning and windows) it seems that mailbox spam is not limited to hawking one particular thing.

Tonight, I get home from work to find a religious flyer in my mailbox. I won't mention the faith in question, because (a) it's largely irrelevant and (b) I don't wish to incite hatred by labeling one particular faith as more spammy than another.

The contents of the flyer itself are not worth commenting on - I didn't even waste any time reading it, but what is laughable is the one-liner at the top of the flyer that caught my eye: "Note: This publication uses the Holy Scriptures; discard it with the proper care". Of course I'll discard it with the proper care - it's on plain paper, so it went quite nicely straight into the recycling bin. What did they want me to do with it? Bury it? Cremate it? Mail it back?

Warning: the external links referenced in this article will most likely generate popups - do not click on them unless you are one of these fabled people who actually like popups, or if you have a popup blocker in your browser.

Whilst Googling around today, I chanced upon an (old) news article on The Times of India.

Luckily, I am running Mozilla Firefox, which has a built-in popup blocker.

According to my browser, "Firefox prevented this site from opening 7 popup windows". That's right, SEVEN popups. Clicking on "Options" shows 7 URL's off of 4 unique domains.

This is the sort of bullshit that makes the 'Net suck. Obviously, enough people made enough noise for Microsoft to finally integrate a popup blocker in version 7 of Internet Exploiter, long after Opera and Mozilla implemented it in their browsers.

I understand that most sites (especially those that have no corresponding offline presence) need to make revenue and I have no problem with small file-size banner ads in principle. If I am interested in a banner, I'll click on it, rest assured. I will never *EVER* buy or subscribe to anything displayed in a popup.

The same idiocy is practiced by the tuckfards at experts-exchange.com. They evade popup blockers by deliberately obfuscating the JScript to launch a popup, even fooling Firefox:


<script language=javascript><!--
document.write('<scr'+'ipt language=javascript src="http://a.tribalfusion.com/j.ad?site=*removed*
&adSpace=*removed*&size=468x60&type=horiz&noAd=1&requestID=*removed*">
</scr'+'ipt>');
//-->
</script>

[note the obligatory misnomer domain name, indicative of most dotcom-only junk-monger companies these days]

Particularly ironic - given that experts-exchange is a tech resource site, they should already be enclued into how annoying popups really are.

So, webmasters, get a clue: no-one likes popups, so lose them already!

(1) Posted a complaint at The Beeb's Watchdog site.

(2) Posted an abbreviated summary on British Ex-Pats so that other British-Canadians aren't taken for a ride (or flight) by this unscrupulous company.

(3) Posted a complaint with the BBB of Vancouver.

(4) Emailed the acquaintance, who originally recommended Canadian Affair to me, so that they are kept in the loop.

(5) ABTA action will follow when I can find the time to mail off copies of the correspondence to England.

(6) Proving yet again that there is some truth in anagrams: according to Wordsmith.org, an anagram of "The Airline Seat Company", Canadian Affair's other name, is "I emplane, a cheat in story".

My first blog post in a quite a while and it's going to be a long one.

July/August 2005:
My wife, my son and I travel to England to visit my folks for two weeks, flying from Toronto Pearson [YYZ] to Birmingham International [BHX] on Thomas Cook flight #TCX4L. Outbound flight: no problems. Return flight #TCX4K: I am refused boarding, because my British passport (with accompanying perma-resident visa stamp and landing papers) plus Canadian credit, debit and Ontario health cards, are not sufficient proof of Canadian perma-residency, even though my visa stamp and landing papers quite clearly show that I am a perma-resident, not on a student or visitors' visa. The fact that both my wife and son share my last name and that my flight originated at YYZ, is lost on the over-zealous security staff at BHX.

I am forced to cough-up CDN$433 to purchase a one-way ticket for use in returning me back to the UK within 6 months, because Canadian Affair is "acting on instruction from Canadian Immigration" (lie #1 in quotes - explanation will follow later). Thos Cook's travel rep at BHX, Kosmar, say that they do not have access to credit card facilities, even though they are authorised agents for Thos Cook/The Airline Seat Company Ltd (AKA/TA Canadian Affair). Luckily, I have the cash to buy a one-way ticket back to the UK. The Security Officer, who refused me boarding, said that the ticket must be valid for a return flight back to the UK within the next 6 months (the maximum time I can stay in Canada without a special visa) yet Kosmar issues me with a return flight of TCX4L on August 19th. This will become apparent when I summarise my conclusions later.

When I finally arrive back at YYZ, I have no problems with Canadian Passport Control, given my landing papers and passport stamps that proves I've been living in Canada for the past 2 years without any time outside of Canada over 6 months (this is the requirement to maintain perma-residency status). The Passport Control Officer informs me that whilst it is not 100% required, it is preferred that I have my perma-residency card to speed up the entry process. This confirms Thos Cook's first lie: if they were "acting on instructions from Canadian Immigration", then I would have had to either get back on the next plane to the UK (not possible, since the next available flight, TCX4L, is a week away - they only fly/flew out once a week) or I would have to call a relative to bring my perma-resident card to the airport. Neither were required.

According to Canadian Affair's booking terms and conditions (current, looks different to how I remember it when I wrote my my complaint) all complaints must be made within 1 month of return. I faxed my complaint letter on August 25th, thereby satisfying that requirement. Foolishly, given the time-constraint for a complaint submission, I expected a speedy reply - naturally my optimism was mis-placed, because it took Canadian Affair around 6 weeks and 2 chase-up calls to reply. Their letter was dated just "September 2005", but the postmark on the hand-written addressed envelope states October 2nd. This should have been a subtle clue to the sequence of mis-information that would follow from them.

The letter, written by Katherine Tam, Office Manager, Canadian Affair Vancouver, states that "The security officers as you can appreciate are acting on instruction from Canadian Immigration. Although you did have your Social Insurance number and bank cards this is unfortunately not sufficient prove [sic] to enter Canada with a one way ticket". Lie #2: my ticket was not one-way - it was a return ticket, originating from YYZ. Tam continues: "This is because temporary residents can actually obtain such items and not need to surrender such cards upon departure". Lie #3: my passport visa stamp shows that I am a category "IM-1" immigrant, ie. a perma-resident, NOT a temporary resident. Also, temp residents cannot obtain an OHIP card. Tam goes on further to state: "Therefore Canadian Immigration would normally want to see your Permanent Residency also as prove [sic] of your immigration status". Correct, Canadian Immigration would prefer to see my perma-resident card, but it was not necessary when I arrived back at YYZ. Tam then closes out with the following two paragraphs: "I have arranged for a refund of $433 to be sent to you, this will arrive shortly from our Head Office in the UK. We apologies [sic] for the inconvenience caused and hope that you will still choose to fly with Canadian Affair in the future."

I took this to mean that, yes, perhaps I should have had the perma-resident card with me, but that in the interests of good faith, Canadian Affair would be sending me an ex‑gratia refund (not even a little extra on top for all my efforts). Lie #4: payment never came. Fast-forward to December 27th, when I used the extra-long holiday period to sit down and chase up any unfinished business (and the same day I actually got around to starting this blog). I faxed a chase-up letter 2 days later, including a copy of Tam's letter and confirmed receipt with Celia later in the day. Fast forward to April, following 4 months of busy home and work life. My folks asked if I ever got a resolution out of Canadian Affair. This prompted me to call them yet again for an answer. Called on April 26th or 27th and spoke to Russell, who claimed to be a Supervisor. He advised that Katherine Tam was now working in their Glasgow office. Understandably, given that it was already 1900h Eastern Time, he advised that he would not be able to contact her until the next day. Russell promised me a callback the next day, after speaking with Tam. I gave both my work and home numbers. Unsurprisingly, I received no calls or voicemails the next day(s) or on the Monday. So, I called one more time on Saturday May 27th and spoke to Scott, who advised that Tam was back at their Vancouver office. I advised Scott that unless I received a favourable response on Monday May 29th, I would be issuing a charge-back on the original booking (about CDN$1800 versus the amount of CDN$433 I was claiming back) since Canadian Affair did not provide me with the original return-flight service that was paid for in June 2005. Scott would not comment beyond repeating the words "you will receive a call-back on Monday" and again took my work number - he only had my home number on file.

Sure enough, I did get a callback on Monday, but Tam left a voicemail on my home number, requesting a callback. Called Tam on Tuesday 30th and re-issued my threat of the charge-back, which evidently did not get relayed by Scott. Tam advised that after writing her letter in September/October, she referred my complaint to her Head Office and that they wrote to me "shortly afterwards" to turn down the refund request. I never received a second letter, nor any response to my chase-up fax in December or phone call in April, but that is beside the point: Tam had already promised me a refund in her original letter. I advised Tam that if she did not have the authority to issue refunds, she had no business promising me something that could be overridden by another office and, notwithstanding their decision, their communication and general customer service had been extremely poor to-date. Tam once more advised that she would speak with her Head Office and this time relay my charge-back threat.

Tam called back the next day, Wednesday 31st May 2006, to advise that their decision stands and that they would fight any charge-back attempt.

To summarise:
(1) Canadian Affair will use any means necessary to generate extra "revenue" by disingenuously hiding behind "immigration rules" and will hold passengers' return flights ransom, until such time the ransom is paid in cash. It is now obvious as to why Kosmar "could not" take credit-cards for the ransom - Canadian Affair evidently knows that it is exploiting a grey area of the "immigration rules" and obviously wants to reduce the number of legitimate charge-backs. Any passenger, who does not have timely access to cash in Canadian or UK currency, will be shafted - even if they have a life, job and family to get back to in Canada. Any ticket purchased will be under duress, therefore under ransom. Kosmar issues return flights for the next available flight, not for the 6 months - evidently and purposely so that I cannot cancel the return flight for a refund and for them to be able to resell the seat.
(2) Canadian Affair have the temerity to demand complaints to be submitted within one month of the return date, yet will play for time, hoping that complainants will forget to follow up on their claim.
(3) Canadian Affair, when chased, will promise a refund (even on an apparent ex-gratia basis).
(4) Canadian Affair, when chased some more, will play for more time, hoping that complainants will eventually forget or give up. This is presumably intended to make the complainant "shut up and go away".
(5) Canadian Affair, when chased yet again, will then break the refund promise - they will not even have the courtesy or guts to inform the hapless complainant that they have turned down the claim.
(6) Canadian Affair will openly lie about having written a follow-up letter.
(7) As per Canadian Affair's own website: "Canadian Affair is the trading name of a privately owned company called The Airline Seat Company Limited" and "Canadian Affair maintains strategic alliances with Thomas Cook Airlines and My Travel Airways which are exclusive to the company's Canadian routes". According to a Google search, My Travel Airways were formerly known as "The Air Touring Company" aka Airtours. Airtours have had numerous complaints exposed on the BBC's consumer affairs programme Watchdog. It is no small surprise that Canadian Affair should "maintain strategic alliances" with such a disreputable company, even if the flights themselves were on Thomas Cook, not My Travel.

My recommendation: If flying to/from Canada/UK, fly with KLM Royal Dutch Airlines (maybe no direct flights, but good connections via Amsterdam Schipol) or Air Transat. Never had a problem with either airline - I went with Canadian Affair on the recommendation of an acquaintance. Next time, we're going with KLM or Air Transat for sure.

Some good news in today's 24hrs: "The City of Brampton is slapping big fines on those accused of causing advertising pollution. Anyone caught posting signs on public property without a permit could face a whopping $5,000 fine".

It's about time that municipalities went after the street-spamming morons who litter public property with those nasty choroplast signs and bits of paper taped to the sides of bus shelters. It's nothing but commercial graffiti.

Hopefully, the rest of the cities in the GTA will follow suit.

Saw an interesting story on Wednesday in 24hrs, a free daily news rag in the GTA. It looks like one of the big Canadian ISP's is trying to bilk its customers into paying more for a high-priority internet service (what Shaw Communications calls "QoS Enhancement"). This is presumably done in a protection racket-type effort to provide a "reliable" connection for its customers who subscribe 3rd-party VoIP services. Naturally, there is a plug for Shaw's own VoIP service (called "Shaw Digital Phone") with a link at the end of the "QoS Enhancement" page.

Of course, Vonage's cries of "VoIP Tax!" aren't without merit, but this is old news. Primus has had the same ongoing problem since at least May 2005, according to this blog. However, it looks like Vonage is actually trying to do something about it, by complaining to the CRTC.

Shaw's rebuttal is less-than-convincing. It is laughable that Shaw should claim that "contrary to Vonage's claim, Shaw does not offer an Internet telephony service in direct competition with Vonage or any other Internet phone provider. Shaw's Digital Phone service is a carrier-grade, primary line, local and long distance residential telephone service that uses a managed IP network. Shaw Digital phone calls travel directly from Shaw's secure private network to the tried-and-true public telephone system. They do not travel over the Internet. The result is a more reliable and higher quality phone service". Nonsense, Shaw, it's still VoIP. Even though it's not provided through a 3rd-party carrier, it still uses an IP telephony network, ergo it's VoIP by definition.

What contempt Shaw must have for its customers, if they think everyone is so stupid as to not know what VoIP is and how it works. Hopefully, the CRTC will slam them good. I'm glad I'm not a Shaw customer.

Related perma-link.