Monthly Archives: December 2007

Family transit fares don’t make sense

St. Laurent’s Alan DeSousa wants the STM to introduce “family” fares, which would supposedly give group discounts if a household buys multiple transit passes. He says his borough offers family prices for leisure activities, and we need to get more cars off the road.

DeSousa isn’t specific about what he means by family fares. It could be discounts (or tax rebates) when buying monthly passes, or it could be discounts when travelling as a group.

Here’s the thing with the latter option:

  • Leisure activities tend to be done as families, because families spend their leisure time together. Public transit tends to be the opposite: Everyone headed in different directions at different times. How often do you board a bus with two or more members of your immediate family at the same time?
  • Even the most fervent public transit supporters will concede that family activities will almost always require use of a car, if only to transport all the food, diapers and other supplies they need to take with them.
  • How do you enforce such a thing? I’ve gone to Ottawa and travelled on their “family” fare with a female friend, pretending she was my wife. The drivers there don’t care, it’s not like they’re going to ask for a marriage certificate. So it really comes down to a group discount, usually for two adults and up to two or three children. And why should group discounts be limited to families?
  • Families travelling together is hardly the most pressing need environmentally. In fact, environmental policies encourage carpooling. What we need to get off the roads are people who drive alone to work during rush-hour, not the family carload heading to the amusement park.

The other option (giving families discounts for buying monthly passes) has its own problems:

  • We already get a federal tax break for buying transit passes.
  • Once again: Why is this treated differently from any other form of group discount? Certainly others, like offering a discount for someone who buys a transit pass for 12 consecutive months, would be more popular and more successful.
  • It increases paperwork, which benefits accountants and civil servants more than it does anyone else. This is especially true if families have to prove relationships before they can get the discount.
  • Unless more people start buying passes as a result, this would decrease revenue for the STM, requiring either more cash from the city, reduced services or higher fares for everyone else.
  • There’s no direct link between number of people in a household and ability to pay for public transit. There are plenty of poor people without families (indeed, for many of them that tends to be why they’re poor in the first place), and plenty of rich people with families (where mommy and daddy both have their cars and drive them to work, coming up with some flimsy excuse why they can’t take public transit).

It’s a gimmick, and I doubt it’s going to do anything to help public transit. Instead, more buses, lower fares and more investment in things like reserved bus lanes will bring people out of their cars. It’s boring, but it works.

TWIM: Facebook Beacon – threat or menace?

This week’s bluffer’s guide, courtesy of yours truly, is about Facebook Beacon, the outside-website-integration idea that provoked a lot of ruckus among techies because it wasn’t as clearly opt-in as it should have been. That, in turn, prompted a petition from MoveOn.org, media coverage, “block beacon” instruction sites and, eventually, a backtrack and apology from Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg.

Some privacy advocates are still concerned that Facebook is receiving the information even if it’s not publicizing it anymore without explicit permission.

Private security giving speeding tickets sounds like a bad idea

Playing the Bianca Leduc card with little shame, western off-island mayors want the Quebec government to give them the power to give private security firms the power to hand out tickets for moving violations (such as speeding). They say the SQ is insufficient at the job, partially because their officers are paid so damn much.

Currently, with two notable exceptions, only police officers (municipal police, SQ or otherwise) can hand out legally-enforceable tickets to people. The two exceptions are Stationnement de Montréal (the green onions), who hand out parking tickets (but cannot ticket motorists for moving violations like going through a red light or making a wrong turn), and private security inspectors who patrol the public transit system (like the inspectors AMT hires to check proof of purchase on commuter trains), who can ticket for failing to pay a fare or other minor violations. In neither case are the agents armed, and they cannot make arrests or otherwise forcibly confine citizens.

What the mayors want is a system more like we see in the U.S., in which private companies have a limited role in law enforcement, and their actions are under constant scrutiny (to the point of having video cameras record alleged infringements).

Only one mayor, Michel Kandyba of Pincourt, has stuck out as having reservations about the idea:

Pincourt Mayor Michel Kandyba said he doesn’t agree with the other mayors that it’s a good idea to create a new category of unarmed agents to issue tickets for moving violations. More SQ officers doing more Highway Code enforcement is the better way to go, he said.

“Just imagine all the things that could go wrong with unarmed officers, given the lack of respect people have for authority in Quebec,” he said. “Imagine someone unarmed, who is not a police officer, saying to you, ‘Hey, you’re speeding, I’m giving you a ticket.'”

I think his point is very important, not because I think people are going to pull guns on these unarmed enforcement agents, but because being a police officer is more than just putting on a uniform with a big belt. There’s a reason that SQ officers are paid more than these glorified bouncers that work for private security firms, and that reason makes them much more qualified to handle the high stress situations that will arise when you stop someone for speeding.

Another reason I have reservations about this idea is because of the inequities it creates. Cities with big budgets and rich property owners will be able to afford better security. And then what’s next? Their own private court system? Private hospitals? Will their citizens get a discount on tickets compared to visitors from out of town? 2-for-1 deals?

Maybe I’m just being paranoid and silly. But can SQ officers just be replaced on the roads of Quebec’s small towns with private security officers who are paid half as much?

What would you ask a Ron Paul supporter?

The Globe and Mail’s Ivor Tossell has an article discussing the “wingnuts” who flood the Web, stuffing virtual ballots in favour of Republican presidential long-shot Ron Paul.

Just as interesting are the comments attached to the story, many of which are from people from the U.S. and elsewhere who had never seen the Globe and Mail before today. (A couple called globeandmail.com a “no name website” and suggested he wrote the article just for the traffic it would bring from Ron Paul supporters.)

I’m going to be talking to a Montreal-based Ron Paul supporter soon for an upcoming article. What questions should I ask him?

Violence is funny

I know it’s wrong to make fun of victims of violence, but:

  • We’re just now getting around to compensating store owners after the post-Stanley Cup riots in Montreal. The riots where we won the Stanley Cup. In 1993. Fourteen years ago.
  • Joe Clark was punched in the face for no apparent reason on Sherbrooke street last month, giving him a bloody nose.
  • A Union Station street meat vendor got badly burned after he lost consciousness and his clothes caught fire. The headline for this story on the Edmonton Sun website was, for a brief time, “Toronto hotdog vendor roasted.”

Can’t we laugh, just a little bit? Please?

Do bloggers have to fit the stereotype to be accepted?

In October, blogger Mario Asselin asked his readers to evaluate what makes a good journalist blog. He was researching an article that has just been published in Le Trente about Quebec’s journalist-bloggers. In it, he concludes there are only two who fit the proper definition: TVA’s Dominic Arpin (ironic since he’s since stopped blogging) and freelancer Nicolas Langelier.

Now, I’m not upset that he didn’t include yours truly in his über exclusive list (especially now since Michel Leblanc has my back). I’m used to being left out of the Quebec blogosphere as an anglophone (mostly because there’s an assumption that “Quebec” and “francophone Canadian” are one and the same). What bothers me more is the criteria used to distinguish a good blogger from a bad one.

It’s something I see a lot of. Because “blog” doesn’t have a very clear definition other than “website with entries displayed in reverse-chronological order,” people are making up their own definitions, putting additional restrictions on the term.

Among the restrictions Asselin and his readers seem poised to apply:

  1. Must have comments enabled for each post (and respond to those comments)
  2. Must be personal and talk about personal, behind-the-scenes issues
  3. Must produce original content (instead of aggregating the content of others)
  4. Must comment on other people’s blogs and otherwise have a presence outside their blog, like going to YULblog meetings
  5. Must update at regular intervals (at least one post a week)
  6. Must write about other bloggers (and especially competing bloggers)

Though all of these things sound great, are they all absolutely required in order to produce a good blog?

The Kate McDonnell’s Montreal City Weblog doesn’t have comments. Craig Silverman’s Regret the Error doesn’t discuss personal issues. Pierre-Léon Lalonde’s Un Taxi La Nuit has sometimes gone weeks without updates. The Gazette’s Habs Inside/Out is mostly aggregation of other people’s content (including that of The Gazette), and Stony Curtis is almost entirely just reposting stuff he’s found online.

Are these not blogs? Are their authors not bloggers?

Where do you draw the line between a “real” blogger and “fake” one?

Bar owners want last call to be the beginning, not the end of drinking

Quebec bar owners, apparently miffed that they can only stay open until 3am, are proposing a change in the law that would allow them to stay open until 6am, serving non-alcoholic drinks and allowing people to detox before heading home. They expertly play the drunk-driving card to try and get public support on their side.

It sounds fantastic at first glance, but knowing how desperately bar owners depend on alcohol sales to stay afloat, I’m asking myself why they would want to stay open three hours later, incurring more expenses, but gaining no further revenue through their cash cow.

I think the immediate benefit from bars due to this legislation is that while it would prohibit selling alcohol after 3am, it would not stop the drinking of alcohol. So instead of packing it in and stumbling home as the chairs are put on the tables, “last call” would be the cue to buy a few more pitchers to get around the law.

But that’s just me being paranoid. I’m sure bar owners care about their customers’ well-being much more than the bottom line.

Symantec survey thinks highly of Symantec

In today’s press-release-masquerading-as-news, comes “Calgary is Canada’s safest cyber-city,” an edited version of this press release by anti-virus software maker Symantec.

Reading that, you might ask yourself how geography is relevant to online security or other stupid questions. But rather than take a comprehensive look at online fraud, bank/mail fraud, or information security practices of businesses and government, it commissions a poll that rates cities based on how many people say they’ve installed up-to-date anti-virus software on their computers.

Talk about thinking highly of yourself. Naturally, the solution to all this is to get more people to install anti-virus and other security software on their computers. And it just so happens…

The press release cherry-picks selections of some other data, without giving any idea how to get full breakdowns from them. Either way, all the data is based on what people say, not on what kinds of online crime actually happen in those cities.

Any bets on how many other news outlets will overlook these facts and run this as if it was a StatsCan report?

My Rogers nightmare continues

Rogers

Today was bill-payment day, when I login to my bank’s website, remember that Firefox somehow causes Desjardins an “internal error,” switch to Safari, login again, and pay my bills for the month.

Two bills, for cable/Internet and hydro, I get in the mail. One bill (credit card) still goes to my parents’ house, but I have all the info online anyway so I don’t need it.

And then there’s Rogers. A few months ago I switched from paper billing to online billing because I wanted a copy of my call history. And the only way I could get that for free was to have online billing. But since then it’s been a nightmare trying to get access to my bills. And even when I do get access, my “call history” is either entirely blank or throws up an error when I try to read it.

Today, my login was “unsuccessful” and my account suspended for no apparent reason (the password was good, and it was my first login attempt). I gave up and decided I’m going to have them switch me back. And since I can’t login to their website, it’ll have to be by phone.
My request was simple: switch from online to paper billing

I press 8 for English, and go through their voice menu. I have to answer a bunch of questions (is my problem “billing” or “account management”?), get stuck in dead-ends (no I’m not trying to pay my bill) and after a half-dozen of these menus (finally telling it I want to speak to a representative), I get another menu asking me if it’s for wireless, cable, Internet or other, then another asking if it’s about a cellphone, blackberry, pager or other, then another asking me to enter my 10-digit phone number, then I’m put on hold.

First representative asked for my phone number, my name, my postal code and my date of birth. She’s very nice and after I tell her my problem she explains that she’ll need to send me to something called “E-care” and they’ll fix it right away. She also says I can do it online much easier, but when I tell her Rogers.com is a nightmare to use she’s sympathetic and says something along the lines of how some people have problems.

Second representative asked for my phone number, my name, my postal code and my date of birth. I tell him my problem and he says the system that takes care of this is “not available to (him) at the moment”, so he’s going to transfer me to another representative who’ll take care of it right away.

Third representative asked me for my phone number, my name, my postal code and my date of birth. I tell her my problem and she explains that her computer can’t make that change and she’ll need to send me to “e-care” so they can reset it. She also says I can do it online. I am confused, because I already thought I was at “e-care”, but she corrects me. So I guess Rep #2 screwed me there.

Fourth representative has a thick Indian accent. He asks me, one at a time, for my phone number, my name, my postal code and my date of birth. I tell him my problem, and he asks me why I want to change. Rather than spend 20 minutes trying to argue with this guy about the hellhole that is Rogers.com, I bite my tongue and just say I prefer paper billing. He explains I can do it online, but he can do it himself as well.

He explains he’s made the change and now my previous bills (that were only online) are now inaccessible. I ask him how the heck I’m supposed to get copies of them for tax purposes now. He says he can put me back on online billing, and I can download the bills and then switch back. I figure now I have to tell him about not being able to login, and he unlocks my account lockout. I login (with the same password I used before) and I get access to the system. He explains (“Do you see the girl on the couch? Just under her…”) what to do and I end the call.

Total call time: 12:37.

I go to this month’s bill, and click on the button that gives me a PDF version. I get this:

System Error / Erreur système

We’re sorry, the epost service you have requested is temporarily unavailable. Please try again shortly. We apologize for any inconvenience.

Désolé, le service postel que vous avez demandé est temporairement inaccessible. Veuillez essayer à nouveau un peu plus tard. Nous nous excusons de tout inconvénient que cela pourrait vous causer.

So I can’t download my bills, which means I can’t unsubscribe from online billing, which means I just wasted 20 minutes.

Thanks Rogers.

Online billing, paper bullshit

But, I hear you ask, what about all the trees I’ll be hurting?

Well, since I’ll need to print my bills out anyway, the effect is pretty minimal. They pay postage, so that’s not a factor.

Besides, Rogers doesn’t really seem to care about the environment themselves, as evidenced by a letter I received in the mail this month.

The letter, by Rogers Wireless president Rob Bruce, has nothing but bullshit marketingese like “continued loyalty”, “never take for granted”, “working hard”, “committed”, “exceed your expectations”, “unprecedented”, “Canada’s Most Reliable Network” (capitalized, of course), “clearest reception and fewest dropped calls.*” (their footnote, not mine), “moving forward”, “even more innovative technology”, “improve your experience with us”, “our commitment” and “work relentlessly”. And he wishes me and my family a “happy upcoming holiday season.”

What gets me about the letter is that it was mailed to me on thick bond paper (about as thick as a business card) in a thick envelope. Could they not have just emailed this BS to me?

The Link profiles The Gazette

The Link at Concordia has a feature article about CanWest and specifically The Gazette cutting staff in its newsroom. It includes an interview with Gazette editor-in-chief Andrew Phillips, who says the shift from print to online is a “cultural shock.”

Though the article is unsurprisingly negative in tone, it provides quite a bit of insight into the situation at the paper, as well as what the future holds for print media in general.

A couple of things though:

  1. While The Gazette’s lobby is very pretty and there are some shiny yellow surfaces, I doubt it’s actually made of solid gold as the article implies.
  2. Sorry Mike Gasher, but “linkalism” is not a word.

Toronto bus transfers: fascist?

At French School Confidential: A comparison of Montreal and Toronto bus transfers.

I would only add that the main difference between the two is that Montreal transfers are designed to be read by machine (and bus drivers who understand their codes), while Toronto transfers are designed to be read by people.

I’ve always liked our punch-card transfer system. It just works, and has so far resisted modernization efforts that have changed just about everything from mechanical to electronic: Parking meters, thermostats, car windows/ignition/steering/locks, radio tuners… How long before the transfer goes too?

Just give us the disk and we’ll give you your life back

Builders of the CHUM mega-hospital (that’s the French one) were showing off a prototype of their state-of-the-art patient rooms last week. They include the latest in accessibility and technology:

It will also feature an electronic gadget to read the bar code on a patient’s identification bracelet and automatically dispense appropriate medication.

“The bar code is to distinguish among three people (for example) all named Claude Gagnon on the same floor,” Leclerc said.

“The medicine dose will be prepared by a robot. The patient’s charts will be filed electronically in the computer.”

The electronic gadget will be connected to the hospital’s mainframe, which will be connected to the Net, but both will be protected from unwanted intrusions by Gatekeeper security software by Gregg Microsystems. So your medicine dispensing will be perfectly secure and 100% accurate, unless you’re friends with Angela Bennett.

(In case you don’t get the obscure movie reference, the previous paragraph is fiction.)

Census data doesn’t show anything new

As you might expect, the media went crazy over reports from the 2006 census that the percentage of francophones has dropped and the percentage of anglophones is up slightly for the first time in three decades.

The numbers are hardly staggering. The number of Quebecers who speak French at home is still over 80%.

The West Island Chronicle breaks down the West Island numbers, though it does so in prose so it’s hard to tell what’s actually going on. Basically, the West Island is following the trend, with little difference in anglo/franco ratios but a big jump in allophones through immigration.

More messy home trainwrecks

Following last week’s announcement of more housing inspectors for the city of Montreal, TVA talks with a housing inspector about some apartment-dwellers who live in inhabitable piles of garbage. The worst cases tend to involve people who have compulsive hoarding syndrome, a mental disorder that causes people to hold on to things with little or no value.