| Proof of the improving economy |
[Feb. 2nd, 2010|08:38 am] |
I'd like to propose my own leading indicator of economic recovery. The amount of investment spam I receive is both increasing and is of better quality.
The latest tidbit I received purports to be from a firm named "Condor Options." While it may be an "affiliate," the email seems to originate from their own servers. It's, er, hawking a free two-week trial of their Iron Condors newsletter.
There are a couple of amusing things about this particular tidbit. The first when I googled "Iron Condor" and spam, this link came up. The second, and this really gives me hope for a recovery, is that this particular spammer can afford to use Rackspace. |
|
|
| Now that's service! |
[Feb. 1st, 2010|06:11 pm] |
Received in email:
Dear Travelocity Member:
Thank you for updating your account information. To make your log-in name easier to remember, we have changed your Travelocity log-in name to your email address: XXX@XXXXXXX.XXX Your password has not been changed.
My old log-in name was "benveniste." Thanks Travelocity. |
|
|
| The mathematics of Navy Advertising. |
[Jan. 31st, 2010|04:52 pm] |
I just heard a commercial for the U.S. Navy on television. Then I replayed it to make sure I heard what I thought.
The ad used the phrase "infinitely more courageous and driven than most." Think about that for a minute.
The only way that could be possible is if "most" don't have any courage or drive at all, in which case it's true of anyone who has the slightest amount of either.
I'm not sure, but I think the Navy has just insulted more than half of the U.S. Population, while at the same time giving the brave men and women who serve the only the slightest praise.
Mission accomplished? |
|
|
| If a politician's lips move... |
[Jan. 26th, 2010|07:31 pm] |
... they ain't necessarily lying. They might just be too ignorant to know the difference.
Yesterday, WBZ reported about vandalism at a Worcester, MA public school. The damage was massive, systematic, and clearly intentional. I sincerely hope they catch the perps, because I'd love to hear a defense lawyer try to justify their actions. Mental illness my ass.
However, it's the fine print of the story that has me bemused. Quoting, "Because the school is self-insured, school officials hope a corporate angel and the public help repair and replace what was destroyed." I have a futile hope that whoever told WBZ that reads this.
Dear Spin Doctor:
Self-insurance is not, as you think, a euphemism for no insurance. A self-insurance plan requires one to judge risk and project future expected losses, and then, most importantly, to build and maintain a reserve of capital in order to pay for those losses if and when they do occur. For example, a delivery company may self-insure against package breakage and loss, because they have a statistically significant number of events and a track record of loss percentage.
If the Belmont School in Worcester had such a plan and reserve, it's buried very deep in the school budget. So deep, in fact, that the failure to disclose it would be a violation of law. The call out to corporate angels and the public for donations is further evidence of that the school system had a naked exposure and is now, well, embarrassed. In fact, WHDH notes that the computers which were destroyed were donated in the first place.
Self-insurance can be a savvy financial strategy. Having to beg for relief after this sort of disaster is not. So are you a liar or a fool?
Sincerely,
Me.
P.S. I would be remiss if I didn't offer my congratulations on one point, though. So far, I haven't found anyone referring to this incident as "terrorism." |
|
|
| Congratulations to the Massachusetts Democratic Party |
[Jan. 19th, 2010|09:48 pm] |
I didn't think it was possible to make the Massachusetts Republican party look organized, engaged, exciting, and effective. Yet with Ms. Coakley's defeat, that's exactly what you did.
Didn't you learn anything about complacency, arrogance, and negative campaigning from the Shannon O'Brien defeat in 2002? |
|
|
| (no subject) |
[Jan. 17th, 2010|03:51 pm] |
| [ | mood |
| |  frustrated | ] |
Dear Scott Brown:
I realize you are a graduate of Boston College Law School, but did you really say "terrorists should face military justice and not be granted constitutional protections?" I happen to know at B.C., they do teach about false middle fallacies. Were you absent for that?
Robocalls and "roadblock" Google Ads on almost every page I hit doesn't win you any points from me. Your website has nothing but soundbites -- there's no substantive discussion of any of your positions nor any references for your claims. Everyone wants lower taxes, but you give exactly zero examples of what spending you plan on cutting. Defense? Social Security? Medicare? Nope, nope, and nope. I wish I could say Massachusetts deserves better than you.
Dear Martha Coakley:
I realize you are a graduate of Boston University Law School, but did you really say "If the goal was and the mission in Afghanistan was to go in because we believed that the Taliban was giving harbor to terrorists. We supported that. I supported that. They're gone. They're not there anymore." I happen to know at B.U., the do teach lawyers about the need to back up such claims with evidence. Were you absent for that?
Robocalls and negative ads from you, the DSCC, [u]and[/u] the SEIU [em][b]during the same 1/2 hour show[/b][/em] doesn't win you any points from me. Your website has more detail than Mr. Brown's, but since the primary you've run a campaign based on entitlements. Not giving them out -- I expect that from a Massachusetts Democrat, but that you were somehow entitled to the seat. While you blame the overwhelming deficit on a "reckless administration," you are proposing more tax cuts and more spending increases than you are tax increases. I wish I could say Massachusetts deserves better than you.
While I will be going to the polls on Tuesday, I face the choice of wasting my vote or selecting the "least bad" choice. I truly resent that.
Sincerely,
Mike Benveniste |
|
|
| Have I got a job for you! |
[Jan. 14th, 2010|10:09 pm] |
I received email from a recruiter today, which in part read:
"Your expertise in OO design, RDBMS/SQL, warehousing, XML, design patterns, UML and solid SDLC shills will be put to good use."
In my professional life, I've known a number of SDLC shills. In fact, that's true whether SDLC was supposed to stand for Software Development Life Cycle or for Synchronous Data Link Control. |
|
|
| Gee, ya think? |
[Jan. 4th, 2010|08:16 am] |
Information Week has posted a typically hard hitting article entitled, 7 Things Microsoft Must Do In 2010. I particularly like #7:
"Launch A Game-Changer. Finally, Microsoft needs to release a new product in 2010 that will set the industry abuzz."
Just that easy, right? I can just imagine the email the executives at Infoweek or Microsoft: "Please tell me by tomorrow how many successful disruptive technologies you will produce next year." |
|
|
| Received Spam du Jour |
[Oct. 30th, 2009|09:46 am] |
<snip>
Dear {{first_name}} {{last_name}},
It is my pleasure to inform you that on October 27th, 2009 your information was reviewed and accepted for inclusion in the 2009/2010 edition of our registry.
Strathmore's Whos Who each year, recognizes and selects key executives, professionals and organizations in all disciplines and industries for outstanding business and professional achievements. ...
</snip>
At least in the pre-internet version of this, if you sent your money in you'd get the egoboo of seeing your name in a book. |
|
|
| Today's Joy |
[Oct. 13th, 2009|01:25 pm] |
Over Autumn Leaves
While banking for a landing
The shadow of our plane |
|
|
| Go Amtrak! Or not. |
[Oct. 12th, 2009|08:43 pm] |
If you are considering riding Amtrak for a vacation trip, I have a favor to ask. Please consider the impact on my wallet.
A headline at ABC news today read: "Fewer Riders on Amtrak, but Still 2nd Best Year." Here is the actual press release.
Although the press release tries to be upbeat, even it has hints of the downside. A deeper look at the numbers reveals a bit more.
First, revenue decreased by a greater percentage than number of passengers. So not only did Amtrak get fewer rides, they averaged less money per ticket. This does not appear to be due to people taking shorter trips, as Amtrak claims an increase on long-haul routes. Instead, it appears that Amtrak had to cut fares to attract the number of customers they did.
Second, the Amtrak FY 2009 Business Plan was for a 7% increase in ticket revenue, not a 7% decrease. The document is dated December 2008, when even the U.S. Government knew that we were in a recession. It comes as no shock to me that it was hopelessly optimistic.
That business plan called for an operating loss of just over a billion dollars. We can add a couple of hundred million to that due to the revenue shortfall. What that means is that ticket revenue did not even cover Amtrak salaries, wages, and benefits. We taxpayers picked the rest of the payroll, not to mention little details such as fuel, wear and tear, facilities, advertising and materials.
The business plan lists total federal support in FY 2009 as 1,537 billion dollars. If you toss in a revenue shortfall of 200 million on top of that, it means that taxpayers ended up paying more for the average trip on Amtrak than the passenger paid.
Did I mention the other good news? Amtrak is now boasting 80% on-time performance. Of course, they use a somewhat looser definition than the airlines, but that's up from 71% in FY 2008. Of course, in 1985, Amtrak's OTP performance "peaked" at around 82 percent. This is progress?
I'm not anti-train. Nor do I think it's reasonable to expect train travel to survive without subsidies while automobile and air travel does receive several forms of indirect subsidy. But Amtrak was formed as a politically tolerable way to phase out passenger rail travel. Long-term public ownership wasn't suppose to be part of the plan.
The best estimate I've seen of subsidies, both direct and indirect, for automobile travel is around $180 billion dollars per year. That works out to about 6 cents a mile. If it was possible to get the [u]direct[/u] subsidy for intercity rail down to merely twice that, I'd say keep Amtrak. But in the nearly 40 year history of Amtrak, it hasn't come close to that modest goal. It's long past time to shut it down. |
|
|
| Nobel Peace Prize |
[Oct. 9th, 2009|09:51 am] |
To quote Robert Gibbs: "Wow."
In these musings, I've bashed Republicans and Democrats alike. But I've also cut Obama some slack because of the mess he inherited. Perhaps I'm doing that still, but here goes:
In the last couple of weeks, we've seen two hopelessly politicized processes reach two very different results. Despite Obama's campaigning, Chicago was the first finalist dropped as an Olympic Host City. Yet with what I believe to be little or no political pressure from the Obama camp, he gets a Nobel Peace Prize.
I see this award as a not-so-subtle insult to the former Bush Administration. That insult may be deserved, but as with any insult timing is crucial. As an insult, the award comes far too late. As an honor for President Obama, it's at best premature.
I don't think that the Nobel committee intended to provide ammunition to Obama's political adversaries, but I predict that's exactly what they've done.
Wow. |
|
|
| Today's 5 cents |
[Oct. 1st, 2009|06:48 pm] |
In my grammar school history classes, I learned that the Boston Tea Party was a demonstration against "taxation without representation." It was much later in life that I learned that the Tea Party was bankrolled by John Hancock, who was far more upset that the Brits were undercutting his prices on the tea he smuggled in from Holland. But history is written by the winners, so we call the events of that November 1773 night part of the "opening act of the American Revolution" instead of "a terrorist act of organized crime."
Looked at in that light, today's new tax is not ironic at all. It's just another example of a long standing tradition of Massachusetts political hypocrisy.
Today, Boston and 29 other Massachusetts towns raised their meals taxes and hotel taxes. So the tax rate on prepared meals is now 0.75% higher than for general merchandise, and 7.00% higher than for food bought in a grocery store. As a result, lunch today cost me a nickel more than it would have yesterday. It's a trivial amount, but over the course of a year it will add up to about 15 bucks or so just for lunch and coffee.
These types of taxes are very popular these days, specifically because they are taxation without representation. By their very nature, a disproportionate burden falls on non-residents. After all, the vast majority of hotel rooms are purchased by non-residents, as are a large percentage of restaurant meals. Rental cars are even worse; the effective tax rate on Rental Cars at Logan Airport is on the order of 30% or so. In the U.S. Senate, there's broad support to charge a $10 "assessment" to people visiting the U.S. from abroad.
The Mayor of Boston, Mumbles Menino, pushed hardest for the right to levy the new taxes. So it's only appropriate that today, the first day of the hike, he writes a column expressing his "thrill" at the BIO International Convention return to Boston for 2012, saying "This time Boston will share in the revenue generated from this event because the meals and hotel tax will bolster our bottom line."
Of course Boston benefited greatly from tourism and conventions before the new taxes as well. It just took a little longer for the money to wind its way to the city coffers for Mr. Menino to spend.
So do people really believe this illusion cast by cowardly political hacks? After all, my turn at being the "other person" paying the tax came today, but everyone gets their chance in time. Are we too lazy to throw the bums out, or do we just want to believe?
Taxation without representation. It once was a tagline for revolution. Today, it's not just a great political idea. It's the law. |
|
|
| In the "more is better" category |
[Sep. 29th, 2009|08:05 am] |
I just received yet another directive from IT, stating that I must change my password within 7 days and it "Cannot match 24 of your previous passwords."
Since passwords are typically stored with a one-way encryption algorithm, I suppose it's mathematically possible that a new password could match 24 of my old ones. But I'd hate to have to compute the odds.
So I'm going to assume that they will prevent me from using any of my last 24 passwords. Just in case, of course, that someone got a hold of one and has been retrying it ever since.
Hasn't anyone in the IT community figured out that this encourages people to either sequence their passwords (goAway01, goAway02, etc) or write them down so they don't forget what they invented this time?
I suspect that when reporting to senior management, the genius who thought of this will claim they've made the system more than twice as secure as when the limit was 10. |
|
|
| And speaking of Pirates... |
[Sep. 19th, 2009|12:15 pm] |
| [ | Current Location |
| | Waiting in Line | ] |
| [ | mood |
| | grumpy | ] |
| [ | music |
| | Driving My Life Away | ] |
... I'm going to take a not so cheap shot at the Massachusetts Registry of Motor Vehicles.
When I first arrived in Massachusetts in the 1980's, the RMV was legendary for it's long lines, rude workers, and overall inefficiency. In fact, it was used as the basis for a business school case study of how not to do things.
Then things began to change under the Weld Administration, and for a while the RMV was making a real effort at customer service. They updated their systems, and, at least at the Registry branch I used in Reading, made a real effort at customer service. While it was never fun to have to make the trip, it became just another chore. In fact, I cited it as an example of how government could change.
But then the cycle began to swing in the other direction. Massachusetts started closing some branches and moving them to less convenient places. Not only did they close the "express" registries in shopping malls, but the Reading location also went dark. Finally, about 10 months ago, registrar Rachel Kaprielian sent out this message, telling us of RMV budget cuts. And so it was that earlier this week, I drove up to Lawrence to get my license renewed.
When I left the house, the website gave an estimate of a 20 minute wait. For the first 35 minutes after I arrived, there were exactly zero renewals processed. The staff appeared to be socializing instead. I eventually concluded that the computers must have gone down, but no one bothered to tell anyone that. Even after things started moving again, the staff member at window 2 apparently went on break for a solid 45 minutes.
I finally got my renewal 90+ minutes and 50 dollars later. But I was curious about those budget cuts. After all, I guess it makes sense to cut back on such luxuries as customer service in a recession, so I was curious how hard Ms. Kaprielian was working to "squeeze every penny of savings" from my tax dollars.
So I found the following historical look at RMV spending (in 1000's of dollars):
Fiscal Year 2005: 45,778
Fiscal Year 2006: 49,655
Fiscal Year 2007: 42,459
Fiscal Year 2008: 53,228
Fiscal Year 2009: 54,990 (Source)
So those budget cuts work out to almost a 30% increase in spending since 2007. Those "every penny of savings?" The RMV's original 2009 budget was $57,464,135. I guess in the world of State Finance, a smaller-than-desired increase equates to a budget cut.
So I guess I have a question for Ms. Kaprielian. Even after these cuts, it looks like Wages and Salaries went up 20% or so in the last 2 years, and operating costs went up even more. Who is getting that extra money, and why? |
|
|
| navigation |
| [ |
viewing |
| |
most recent entries |
] |
| [ |
go |
| |
earlier |
] |
| |
|
|
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
benveniste's journal
hopeful