All Things Scurrilous » Rants

E*trade Sucks (and Ameritrade too)

Trevor — Thu, 21 Jan 2010 22:58:28 +0000

The Sanmina-SCI stock I foolishly purchased through their Employee Stock Purchase Program is currently trading at a third of its purchase price. Now, to add insult to injury, I see that E*trade (the broker Sanmina used for the ESPP) charged me $20 for the 6:1 reverse split last August. They call it a “mandatory reorganization fee” and claim that it’s standard practice to charge this fee. Yet, Fidelity, Scottrade, and USAA, to name a few, don’t seem to agree, as they do not charge this fee. E*trade customer service, both email and phone, refuses to reverse the charge, so it is now my moral imperative to liquidate and close the account. I’ll never use E*trade again, and hope that others will heed this warning as well. Avoid Ameritrade too, which also charges this fee.

According to Kiplinger’s November 2008 report, Fidelity wins as best overall online brokerage, combining tools, research, large selection of funds and bonds, and relatively low fees. Most importantly, they don’t charge for mandatory reorganizations.

Anointing the best broker is tricky because so much depends on the needs and wants of customers. Investors who feel they need a lot of hand-holding may gravitate toward Fidelity and Charles Schwab, which run neck and neck in the race to provide customers with all the advantages of a full-service broker at a discounter’s price. Investors who are willing to settle for fewer bells and whistles will appreciate Muriel Siebert, a small firm that stands out for its selection of mutual funds and third-party research. Price-conscious customers might favor TradeKing and newcomer Options-House, which charge low commissions — $4.95 per stock trade, regardless of the account size — and provide good customer service.

Apathy

Trevor — Tue, 14 Mar 2006 03:00:44 +0000

Work today involved yet another seemingly futile confrontation with the apathy and limited vision of members of another team. Then I was reminded that, like alcohol, apathy is itself a solution to the problems it causes, as summed up by this excellent quote from the movie Seven (aka Se7en):

William Somerset: I just don’t think I can continue to live in a place that embraces and nurtures apathy as if it was virtue.

David Mills: You’re no different. You’re no better.

William Somerset: I didn’t say I was different or better. I’m not. Hell, I sympathize; I sympathize completely. Apathy is the solution. I mean, it’s easier to lose yourself in drugs than it is to cope with life. It’s easier to steal what you want than it is to earn it. It’s easier to beat a child than it is to raise it. Hell, love costs: it takes effort and work.

Bartender, another Apathy & Tonic, right here…

Are Corporations Gay?

Trevor — Tue, 25 Oct 2005 20:31:17 +0000

We were discussing Texas Proposed Constitutional Amendment 2 (of 9) at lunch today.

“The constitutional amendment providing that marriage in this state consists only of the union of one man and one woman and prohibiting this state or a political subdivision of this state from creating or recognizing any legal status identical or similar to marriage.”

While obviously just a hateful, unnecessary, hypocritical attack on the rights of homosexuals, and merely a diversion away from the multitude of failures of our legislators to do anything beneficial this session, it does pose an interesting question: Are corporations gay?

Under United States law, a corporation is treated in many ways as a person, having many of the same constitutional rights as a human being. In the 1886 Supreme Court case of Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Company, Chief Justice Morrison R. Waite announced: “The court does not wish to hear argument on the question whether the provision in the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, which forbids a State to deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws, applies to these corporations. We are all of the opinion that it does.”

Okay, so according to the Supreme Court, corporations are persons. It’s a well-known fact that a person has a gender, male or female, so this would imply that corporations have a gender. But which gender? Given that a lot of people have been fucked by corporations (just ask an Enron employee), I think it’s pretty safe to consider them male. Furthermore, I know a lot of people, men and women, that would say they’ve been totally fucked in the ass by a corporation, making corporations not only sodomitic, but also bisexual, and when it comes to men, gay. So there you have it: Corporations are gay. Q.E.D.

So, to corporations in support of this amendment, such as for the purpose of denying insurance coverage to domestic partners, I’ll just say that I hope you’re not planning any mergers…

To all other Texans, please go vote against this stupidity. Early voting is going on now, and the official vote is Nov. 8.

I Hate Automake

Trevor — Tue, 23 Aug 2005 22:32:42 +0000

Sometimes people wonder whether my blog is purely political and recreational, since I don’t often engage in technical matters with the same zeal as those other issues. Well, to these people, I proudly say: Fuck Automake! Fuck it, fuck the horse it rode in on, and fuck its little dog Libtool too! I’m not first to reach this conclusion either, in exactly those terms no less! Oh, and the same goes for putrid little Autoconf as well. Technical enough?

The whole steaming Automake/Autoconf/Libtool pile of GNU is anathema to end user-friendly binary compatibility and portable software in general. It’s a mess, a kludge, a hack. It gives the illusion of convenience and portability for small open-source projects, but all the while it’s sucking you deeper into maintenance and support hell. Want to write powerful, robust system level code? Not without a ton of impossible to maintain #ifdef’s you won’t. Curious what your system library dependencies are? Good luck! Want to be able to recreate a particular build to reproduce a bug? Hope you can find the machine it was built on!

In case you’re curious about how this highly elegant system works, here’s the most simplistic diagram possible:

So, in conclusion, I think Automake is great… for me to poop on!

Microsoft .CRAP

Trevor — Wed, 15 Jun 2005 08:02:59 +0000

I wanted to install the SharpReader RSS Aggregator for Windows. Unfortunately, like many other Windows RSS readers out there, it requires .NET framework 1.1. You know, Microsoft’s takeoff on Java that combines the large footprint and installation hassles of a bulky VM [err, "CLR"] with their legendary security vulnerabilities. Let’s get this puppy installed!

Step 1: Go to Windows Update and try to install .NET framework.

This should be easy enough; Windows Update usually works okay. Oh wait, it failed with error code 80246005. WTF is error 80246005?!? How is it acceptable for modern software to print an error code like that with no explanation? Was there no room in the >1 GB Windows distribution for an error message? Clip-It will wipe the drool from your chin as it helps you try to change fonts in Word, and yet Microsoft still doesn’t have the technology to supply useful error messages.

Step 2: Try to install other critical updates. (Dependency problem?)

As expected, same error.

Step 3: Follow link to Windows Update installation history to try to get an explanation of error 80246005.

“Failed” link in status column pops up an empty window. Huh, let’s click it again. This time, I get boilerplate text that repeats the error code and contains generic links to the knowledge base and support, but provides no explanation or useful information. Couldn’t they at least decode the fields in the OLE error code for me?

Step 4: Search for error 80246005 in MS Knowledge base.

As usual, no documents found.

Step 5: Google for 80246005.

Also as usual, Google comes through with numerous relevant hits. Apparently, no problem is too common for Microsoft to ignore. Anyway, Aliâ€™s Knowledge Base contains a simple workaround. I love you, Ali.

Step 6: Try to install .NET framework again.

After several minutes of grinding the hard drive like a rock tumbler, I have a shiny new .NET installation. Or at least I will after the beloved Windows restart.

Step 7: Install .NET framework 1.1 Service Pack 1.

Are you kidding? Why didn’t you just send me an updated version to begin with? Is your packaging technology really that cumbersome? Fine, go ahead and install it. And of course you want another restart…

Step 8: Security Update for Microsoft .NET Framework, Version 1.1 Service Pack 1 (KB886903)?

Unbelievable! Another install and restart to have a .NET installation that doesn’t “allow an attacker to compromise your Windows-based system running the Microsoft .NET Framework and gain access to restricted data”!

Step 9: Install SharpReader.

It works great, but was it worth it?