nntp.aioe.org has been down for several days now

[Lynn McGuire]

nntp.aioe.org has been down for several days now and I am beginning to
wonder if it is coming back. Does anyone know ?

I use AIOE and E-S as backups for each other. If AIOE is gone (
https://www.aioe.org is down also ) then I need to find another free
usenet backup.

Thanks,
Lynn

[Paul]

One user contacted Paolo, and Paolo says the RAID failed.

Normally, the redundancy in a RAID, allows recovery by
pulling a single defective drive, and installing a new
drive. The array can rebuild itself, while being in service
and continuing to serve files. That's what a good RAID
will do for you.

In this case, something has happened, which does not
allow instantaneous recovery. That means sufficient
redundancy was lost, the array won't come back up.
Data recovery required... etc.

Based on IP address, the server is a rental in a COLO.
That means you don't get physical access to the machine.

Paolo has been through this level of destruction before.
But the root cause was quite different.

Paul

[Lynn McGuire]

Thanks, that sucks for Paolo.

Lynn

[Adam H. Kerman]

Earthquake in Rome!

[Paul]

On 1/27/2023 12:19 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> Paul <nos...@needed.invalid> wrote:
>> On 1/26/2023 3:46 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>> nntp.aioe.org has been down for several days now and I am beginning to

>> wonder if it is coming back.  Does anyone know ?
>>>
>>> I use AIOE and E-S as backups for each other.  If AIOE is gone (

>>> https://www.aioe.org is down also ) then I need to find another free
>> usenet backup.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Lynn
>>
>> One user contacted Paolo, and Paolo says the RAID failed.
>>
>> Normally, the redundancy in a RAID, allows recovery by
>> pulling a single defective drive, and installing a new
>> drive. The array can rebuild itself, while being in service
>> and continuing to serve files. That's what a good RAID
>> will do for you.
>>
>> In this case, something has happened, which does not
>> allow instantaneous recovery. That means sufficient
>> redundancy was lost, the array won't come back up.
>> Data recovery required... etc.
>>
>> Based on IP address, the server is a rental in a COLO.
>> That means you don't get physical access to the machine.
>>
>> Paolo has been through this level of destruction before.
>> But the root cause was quite different.
>
> Earthquake in Rome!

It's true that it was in Italy at one time, and Italian law applied.

But after Italy, a COLO in Germany was used. The server is a
bit of a jet-setter.

Who knows where it will go next ?

Paul

[Adam H. Kerman]

Paul <nos...@needed.invalid> wrote:
>On 1/27/2023 12:19 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>Paul <nos...@needed.invalid> wrote:
>>>On 1/26/2023 3:46 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:

>>>>nntp.aioe.org has been down for several days now and I am beginning to wonder if it is coming back.  Does anyone know ?

>>>>I use AIOE and E-S as backups for each other.  If AIOE is gone (

>>>>https://www.aioe.org is down also ) then I need to find another free usenet backup.

>>>One user contacted Paolo, and Paolo says the RAID failed.

>>>Normally, the redundancy in a RAID, allows recovery by
>>>pulling a single defective drive, and installing a new
>>>drive. The array can rebuild itself, while being in service
>>>and continuing to serve files. That's what a good RAID
>>>will do for you.

>>>In this case, something has happened, which does not
>>>allow instantaneous recovery. That means sufficient
>>>redundancy was lost, the array won't come back up.
>>>Data recovery required... etc.

>>>Based on IP address, the server is a rental in a COLO.
>>>That means you don't get physical access to the machine.

>>>Paolo has been through this level of destruction before.
>>>But the root cause was quite different.

>>Earthquake in Rome!

>It's true that it was in Italy at one time, and Italian law applied.

>But after Italy, a COLO in Germany was used. The server is a
>bit of a jet-setter.

>Who knows where it will go next ?

I vaguely recall Paolo being affected by an earthquake, perhaps 2019.
Are you saying that AIOE was no longer in Italy at the time? I didn't
know.

[Paul]

On 1/27/2023 10:50 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> Paul <nos...@needed.invalid> wrote:
>> On 1/27/2023 12:19 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>> Paul <nos...@needed.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On 1/26/2023 3:46 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>

>>>>> nntp.aioe.org has been down for several days now and I am beginning to wonder if it is coming back.  Does anyone know ?
>
>>>>> I use AIOE and E-S as backups for each other.  If AIOE is gone (

>>>>> https://www.aioe.org is down also ) then I need to find another free usenet backup.
>
>>>> One user contacted Paolo, and Paolo says the RAID failed.
>
>>>> Normally, the redundancy in a RAID, allows recovery by
>>>> pulling a single defective drive, and installing a new
>>>> drive. The array can rebuild itself, while being in service
>>>> and continuing to serve files. That's what a good RAID
>>>> will do for you.
>
>>>> In this case, something has happened, which does not
>>>> allow instantaneous recovery. That means sufficient
>>>> redundancy was lost, the array won't come back up.
>>>> Data recovery required... etc.
>
>>>> Based on IP address, the server is a rental in a COLO.
>>>> That means you don't get physical access to the machine.
>
>>>> Paolo has been through this level of destruction before.
>>>> But the root cause was quite different.
>
>>> Earthquake in Rome!
>
>> It's true that it was in Italy at one time, and Italian law applied.
>
>> But after Italy, a COLO in Germany was used. The server is a
>> bit of a jet-setter.
>
>> Who knows where it will go next ?
>
> I vaguely recall Paolo being affected by an earthquake, perhaps 2019.
> Are you saying that AIOE was no longer in Italy at the time? I didn't
> know.
>

That's true, but I don't remember the timing of the move exactly.

You can see in the example here, that something must have happened
around this date.

https://web.archive.org/web/20090121135220/http://news.aioe.org/

Unfortunately, archive.org has just stopped responding, so I can't
poke around some more for comparison shots of the before and after.

Paul

[David E. Ross]

From the AIOE administrator:
>
> The RAID controller failed and its failure damaged the contents of
> the disks. Today or tomorrow they let me know what can be recovered,
> if nothing the recovery times will be long
>

--

David E. Ross
<http://www.rossde.com/>.

The only reason we have so many laws is that not enough people will do
the right thing. (© 1997 by David Ross)

[Ray Banana]

For what it's worth:

I have seen aioe resurrecting after 6 weeks of agony in Mama Amorosi's
cellar during the hot summer of 2006, when Paolo was on holidays ;-)

He moved the servers to a colo after that.



--
Too many ingredients in the soup, no room for a spoon

[Anton Shepelev]

Lynn McGuire:

> I use AIOE and E-S as backups for each other. If AIOE is
> gone ( https://www.aioe.org is down also ) then I need to
> find another free usenet backup.

I am a happy user of this Finnish NNTP-to-FidoNet gateway,
which also works for Usenet:

https://www.fidonet.fi/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=nntp:nntp

After registration, you can request the groups you need if
they are not already carried.

--
() ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\ www.asciiribbon.org -- against proprietary attachments

[Newyana2]

"Anton Shepelev" <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> wrote

| I am a happy user of this Finnish NNTP-to-FidoNet gateway,
| which also works for Usenet:
|
| https://www.fidonet.fi/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=nntp:nntp
|

That looks simple. Do you happen to know whether
they carry the MS groups? Half the groups I visit are MS,
so I'm afraid it's not going to work for me to stay on E-S.

[Anton Shepelev]

Newyana2 to Anton Shepelev:

> > https://www.fidonet.fi/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=nntp:nntp
>
> That looks simple. Do you happen to know whether they
> carry the MS groups? Half the groups I visit are MS, so
> I'm afraid it's not going to work for me to stay on E-S.

Not yet. Tommi's service focuses on FidoNet and carries
very few Usenet groups, but he will carry them at request,
which means starting from tabula rasa -- no backlog. There
is still hope for AIOE, if or when it rases from the ashes.

[Lynn McGuire]

I could not find any of the 30 groups that I frequent.

Lynn

[Anton Shepelev]

Lynn McGuire to Anton Shepelev:

> > https://www.fidonet.fi/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=nntp:nntp
>

> I could not find any of the 30 groups that I frequent.

Once you have registered and connected, go to the local
group `+localchat+' and request those groups to be carried.

[Lynn McGuire]

Apparently the prospect of AIOE coming back up is not good. There are
reports circulating that Paulo ??? is very sick and not expected to survive.

Lynn

[Marco Moock]

Where are these reports located?

[Don Spam's Reckless Son]

s|b wrote:

> On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 13:19:29 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>
>> Apparently the prospect of AIOE coming back up is not good. There are
>> reports circulating that Paulo ??? is very sick and not expected to survive.
>

> That's the first I hear of it. AFAIK there is a hardware problem and the
> server is not nearby. Paolo (sic) being on the verge of death is news to
> me and I'm having a hard time believing it. Do you have message-ids to
> the postings that claim this?
>

I'm in Frankfurt quite frequently (such as from now until Thursday
morning) and would be able to take time and go to where the servers are
if it made any sense.

[Adam H. Kerman]

A server farm?

[Don Spam's Reckless Son]

Hosted by "Leaseweb Deutschland", according to various internet tools.

[Adam H. Kerman]

I'm thinking that unless you are an employee you aren't getting in to
the server room.

[Ray Banana]

On 10818 September 1993, Don Spam's Reckless Son wrote:

> I'm in Frankfurt quite frequently (such as from now until Thursday
> morning) and would be able to take time and go to where the servers
> are if it made any sense.

Unless you are a corporate colocation customer with a contract that
allows physical access to the premises, you will not be allowed into the
building. Anyway, for leased servers like aioe's the provider will
replace defective hardware within 24 or 48 hours at no additional
cost.

I don't think the hardware is the cause of this long outage.
Just like with Albasani, I think the problem is to get all the software
installed and configured and the data restored.And sometimes, the
operator of the server is not able or willing to dedicate sufficient
time to the task for various reasons.

--
Too many ingredients in the soup, no room for a spoon

http://www.eternal-september.org

[Bobbie Sellers]

On 4/14/23 21:09, Ray Banana wrote:
> On 10818 September 1993, Don Spam's Reckless Son wrote:
>
>> I'm in Frankfurt quite frequently (such as from now until Thursday
>> morning) and would be able to take time and go to where the servers
>> are if it made any sense.
>
> Unless you are a corporate colocation customer with a contract that
> allows physical access to the premises, you will not be allowed into the
> building. Anyway, for leased servers like aioe's the provider will
> replace defective hardware within 24 or 48 hours at no additional
> cost.
>
> I don't think the hardware is the cause of this long outage.
> Just like with Albasani, I think the problem is to get all the software
> installed and configured and the data restored.And sometimes, the
> operator of the server is not able or willing to dedicate sufficient
> time to the task for various reasons.
>

Thank you Ray for this information. I find it very interesting.
bliss

--
bliss dash SF 4 ever at dslextreme dot com

[B00ze]

Any news of AIOE? I also used to use it as a backup, to access this very
newsgroup when there is trouble with ES.

Regards,

--
! _\|/_ Sylvain / B00...@hotmail.com
! (o o) Member:David-Suzuki-Fdn/EFF/Red+Cross/SPCA/Planetary-Society
oO-( )-Oo Consciousness - the annoying time between naps.

[Sn!pe]

B00ze <B00...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On 2023-01-26 15:46, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>
> > nntp.aioe.org has been down for several days now and I am beginning to
> > wonder if it is coming back. Does anyone know ?
> >
> > I use AIOE and E-S as backups for each other. If AIOE is gone (
> > https://www.aioe.org is down also ) then I need to find another free
> > usenet backup.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Lynn
>
> Any news of AIOE? I also used to use it as a backup, to access this very
> newsgroup when there is trouble with ES.
>
> Regards,

I very much doubt that it will be coming back after all this time.

--
^Ï^. – Sn!pe – <https://youtu.be/_kqytf31a8E>

My pet rock Gordon just is.

[Adam H. Kerman]

Alan B <alanrich...@gmail.com.invalid> wrote:

>B00ze <B00...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On 2023-01-26 15:46, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>
>>> nntp.aioe.org has been down for several days now and I am beginning to
>>> wonder if it is coming back.  Does anyone know ?
>>>
>>> I use AIOE and E-S as backups for each other.  If AIOE is gone (
>>> https://www.aioe.org is down also ) then I need to find another free
>>> usenet backup.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Lynn
>>
>> Any news of AIOE? I also used to use it as a backup, to access this very
>> newsgroup when there is trouble with ES.
>

>ES provides an excellent service but if necessary you could try other free
>alternatives when it rarely goes down such as:
>
><https://solani.org>

Don't say "rarely". You'll jinx it!

[Bobbie Sellers]

On 6/4/23 05:29, s|b wrote:

> On Sat, 3 Jun 2023 08:18:37 -0000 (UTC), Alan B wrote:
>
>> ES provides an excellent service
>

> ES has been know to be down on occasion(s). That's why I decided long
> ago to use NIN (news.individual.net). It's only 10 euro/year and I've
> never known them to be down.
>
Well in the USA quite some years ago I tried to pay with a VISA card
which the payment site did not recognize and so I had to move to
E-S which gives me enough to deal with though not as much as I had hoped
but people have died and left at least one of my groups with no way to post.

[A. Dumas]

s|b <m...@privacy.invalid> wrote:

> On Sun, 4 Jun 2023 07:33:01 -0700, Bobbie Sellers wrote:
>> Well in the USA quite some years ago I tried to pay with a VISA card
>> which the payment site did not recognize
>

> It's been pointed out to me that it somewhere on NIN says it's only for
> Germans. That's probably why your card was refused.

Utter nonsense. "Card refused" for visa or other credit cards isn't even
possible, they only offer paypal and bank transfer (debit card / own
banking app) as can be easily seen on http://news.individual.net

[Bobbie Sellers]

This was some years back and policies may have changed since I
attempted to use my card. But I was never informed as to why my card
was refused.

[B00ze]

On 2023-06-03 04:18, Alan B wrote:

> B00ze <B00...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On 2023-01-26 15:46, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>
>>> nntp.aioe.org has been down for several days now and I am beginning to
>>> wonder if it is coming back.  Does anyone know ?
>>>
>>> I use AIOE and E-S as backups for each other.  If AIOE is gone (
>>> https://www.aioe.org is down also ) then I need to find another free
>>> usenet backup.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Lynn
>>
>> Any news of AIOE? I also used to use it as a backup, to access this very
>> newsgroup when there is trouble with ES.
>

> ES provides an excellent service but if necessary you could try other free
> alternatives when it rarely goes down such as:
>
> <https://solani.org>

Thanks, and they carry ES Support, perfect.

--
! _\|/_ Sylvain / B00...@hotmail.com
! (o o) Member:David-Suzuki-Fdn/EFF/Red+Cross/SPCA/Planetary-Society

oO-( )-Oo BIT: The increment by which programmers slowly go mad.

[Jeff Layman]

On 06/06/2023 09:38, Ed Cryer wrote:

> B00ze wrote:
>> On 2023-06-03 04:18, Alan B wrote:
>>> B00ze <B00...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2023-01-26 15:46, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> nntp.aioe.org has been down for several days now and I am beginning to
>>>>> wonder if it is coming back.  Does anyone know ?
>>>>>
>>>>> I use AIOE and E-S as backups for each other.  If AIOE is gone (
>>>>> https://www.aioe.org is down also ) then I need to find another free
>>>>> usenet backup.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Lynn
>>>>
>>>> Any news of AIOE? I also used to use it as a backup, to access this very
>>>> newsgroup when there is trouble with ES.
>>>
>>> ES provides an excellent service but if necessary you could try other
>>> free
>>> alternatives when it rarely goes down such as:
>>>
>>> <https://solani.org>
>>
>> Thanks, and they carry ES Support, perfect.
>>
>

> I've been using AIOE as backup for ES for years, so I registered with
> Solani as a replacement.
> First impressions look good.
> Doe anyone know who runs it, where and when?

I've been using Solani as a backup to E-S for about 3 years (since
Albasani went). It has been very reliable, although I hardly use it.
It's based in Germany.

--

Jeff

[Chris Schram]

I have been trying for about four days and no joy trying to register at
solani.org. I'd like to think it's not personal, but maybe a huge
backlog of aioe refugees.

--
chri...@me.com is a filtered spam magnet. Email replies may be lost.
You're better off replying to this newsgroup.

[Sn!pe]

Chris Schram <chri...@me.com> wrote:

> On 2023-06-06, Jeff Layman <Je...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> > On 06/06/2023 09:38, Ed Cryer wrote:
> >> I've been using AIOE as backup for ES for years, so I registered with
> >> Solani as a replacement.
> >> First impressions look good.
> >> Doe anyone know who runs it, where and when?
> >
> > I've been using Solani as a backup to E-S for about 3 years (since
> > Albasani went). It has been very reliable, although I hardly use it.
> > It's based in Germany.
>
> I have been trying for about four days and no joy trying to register at
> solani.org. I'd like to think it's not personal, but maybe a huge
> backlog of aioe refugees.

I've had Solani as a backup for some time. Having just tested it,
I find that I can't log in. I suspect it is simply that my account has
expired for lack of use so I've just re-registered at:
<https://www.solani.org/register/>
and I expect to hear by email shortly that I have new credentials.
I'll report back.

[Marco Moock]

Am 06.06.2023 um 09:38:01 Uhr schrieb Ed Cryer:

> I've been using AIOE as backup for ES for years, so I registered with
> Solani as a replacement.
> First impressions look good.
> Doe anyone know who runs it, where and when?

Daniel und Monika Weber
Zugspitzstr. 27
85560 Ebersberg
Deutschland

Benjamin Gufler
Heerstr. 15
81247 München
Deutschland

This is the datacenter:

organisation: ORG-HOA1-RIPE
org-name: Hetzner Online GmbH
country: DE
org-type: LIR
address: Industriestrasse 25
address: D-91710
address: Gunzenhausen
address: GERMANY

[Andy Burns]

s|b wrote:

> It's been pointed out to me that it somewhere on NIN says it's only for
> Germans.

First time I've herd that suggestion, I've just searched their policy
and FAQ, can't see anything like it ...

[William Unruh]

On 2023-06-07, s|b <m...@privacy.invalid> wrote:

> On Mon, 5 Jun 2023 15:40:47 -0000 (UTC), A. Dumas wrote:
>
>> Utter nonsense. "Card refused" for visa or other credit cards isn't even
>> possible

Well, we must live in different universes. When trying to buy a French
rail ticket with a N American credit card, it refuses to issue a ticket.
It refuses to charge my credit card.
>
> Do you know the meaning of the word "probably"? I've never owned a
> credit card, IOW I was guessing.
>

[Adam H. Kerman]

William Unruh <un...@invalid.ca> wrote:
>On 2023-06-07, s|b <m...@privacy.invalid> wrote:
>>On Mon, 5 Jun 2023 15:40:47 -0000 (UTC), A. Dumas wrote:

>>>Utter nonsense. "Card refused" for visa or other credit cards isn't even
>>>possible

>Well, we must live in different universes. When trying to buy a French
>rail ticket with a N American credit card, it refuses to issue a ticket.
>It refuses to charge my credit card.

Bank card numbers are 20 digits long in Europe but 16 digits long in the
United States. These days, with American banks issuing EMV chipped cards
-- the standard first introduced in Europe, this shouldn't make the card
unreadable in another country.

Any number of things might have happened.

1) The French don't wish to pay the currency conversion fee or have no
way to pay the surcharge onto the purchaser.

2) The cardholder didn't notify his bank or credit card network that
he's travelling, to expect to authorize charges; this is basic security.

3) The cardholder exceeded his credit limit.

4) Something else I haven't thought of.

Travellers cheques used to be a real convenience as they limited the
trveller's possible losses and, under certain circumstances, could be
replaced. I never believed it was safe to travel with one's main credit
card or cell phone to another country. There are ways to get temporary
credit cards and cell phones to use while travelling.

[Andy Burns]

Adam H. Kerman wrote:

> Bank card numbers are 20 digits long in Europe

all mine (UK) are 16 digits, and always have been.

> but 16 digits long in the
> United States. These days, with American banks issuing EMV chipped cards
> -- the standard first introduced in Europe, this shouldn't make the card
> unreadable in another country.

last time I was in the USA (20+ years ago) we had chip'n'PIN cards, but
I got the feeling most Americans just had magstripe, when paying by card
at a till, you had to let it know whether you were paying by credit or
debit, or it failed.

[Adam H. Kerman]

Andy Burns <use...@andyburns.uk> wrote:
>Adam H. Kerman wrote:

>>Bank card numbers are 20 digits long in Europe

>all mine (UK) are 16 digits, and always have been.

Fair enough. I thought Europe had made this transition.

>>but 16 digits long in the
>>United States. These days, with American banks issuing EMV chipped cards
>>-- the standard first introduced in Europe, this shouldn't make the card
>>unreadable in another country.

>last time I was in the USA (20+ years ago) we had chip'n'PIN cards, but
>I got the feeling most Americans just had magstripe, when paying by card
>at a till, you had to let it know whether you were paying by credit or
>debit, or it failed.

When I was a yout', I was a cashier in a department store. I remember
the multipart forms separated by carbon paper, and the swipe mechanical
device that took the impression of the embossed account number on the
face of the credit card. This is why credit cards are still embossed to
this day as these impression machines can still be used with failure of
communication.

The spent carborns were a security risk as the impression was quite
clear on them. Smart cardholders knew to request the carbons to dispose
of themselves but very few shoppers did that. All someone committing
fraud needed was to make a mechanical device that could emboss plastic
card blanks. Both the card number and month of expiration were all that
was necessary. Any name could have been used on the card; this wasn't
checked.

We were given books of closed and stolen accounts. The printing was tiny
and the pages were newsprint. We received new booklets weekly. We
checked each card number to make sure it wasn't listed.

Read-only magnetic stripes were a major improvement. The merchant had a
dial-up terminal to his bank to swipe the card to authorize or decline
the transaction. It allowed for those incredibly expensive
fully-integrated cash registers with built-in cardreaders.

Unfortunately, with inexpensive equipment, it wasn't terribly difficult
to commit fraud by creating one's own encoded magnetic stripe. Also,
information on the magnetic stripes could be intercepted by placing a
second reader within the reader.

There was a hell of a lot of deployed infrastructure for the magnetic
stripe reading system. When MasterCard and Visa jointly specified the
chips, it was easier to introduce in Europe because magnetic stripe
readers weren't as widely deployed. I assume magnetic stripe cards were
available to European cardholders, but I have no idea.

Europeans authorize the purchase with a PIN. In America, it was
authorized with a signature, but it's not like the cashier had a
signature available for comparison. These days, it's quite common for
merchants to tell the purchaser not to sign.

Debit cards are a separate issue. They include ATM cards, but the ones
with MasterCard or Visa branding can be used for retail transactions.

My credit union sent me, without authorization, a branded debit card. I
destroyed it and ordered them to cancel the account. It took a while but
someone figured out how to get me an unbranded ATM card issued that
could not be used for retail transactions.

Merchants despise debit cards. For reasons I've never understood, the
fees the merchant pays to his bank are significantly higher than credit
card fees. He does receive the proceeds sooner, say overnight, but it's
not enough to make up for the difference in fees.

It's possible to ask a merchant to authorize a debit card as a credit
card. Then the user would sign, and I guess the merchant pays the lower
fee. If the transaction is authorized as a debit card, then the
four-digit PIN is required and the shopper can get cash back.

Banking laws protecting consumers from fraud using debit cards are quite
weak, and it's just a bad deal overall to use them. The laws protecting
the consumer from fraud using a credit card are better.

Banks finally started issuing EMV-chipped credit and debit cards. Enough
merchants must have bought the necessary equipment to make it
worthwhile. I do recall in early years, merchants had equipment that
appeared to be able to read chips and magnetic stripes, but for some
reason, had no ability to turn on the chip reader. I noticed stores
needed another generation of equipment. I don't know what the issue was.

Then it took a few more years for banks to issue NFC credit cards, in
which the card has an EMV chip and RFID array to be read at a touch
terminal that doesn't require the card to be inserted. My NFC credit
card almost never works with NFC readers, so I insert the chip anyway.

[Jeff Layman]

On 07/06/2023 20:13, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> Andy Burns <use...@andyburns.uk> wrote:
>> Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>
>>> Bank card numbers are 20 digits long in Europe
>
>> all mine (UK) are 16 digits, and always have been.
>
> Fair enough. I thought Europe had made this transition.
>
>>> but 16 digits long in the
>>> United States. These days, with American banks issuing EMV chipped cards
>>> -- the standard first introduced in Europe, this shouldn't make the card
>>> unreadable in another country.
>
>> last time I was in the USA (20+ years ago) we had chip'n'PIN cards, but
>> I got the feeling most Americans just had magstripe, when paying by card
>> at a till, you had to let it know whether you were paying by credit or
>> debit, or it failed.
>
> When I was a yout', I was a cashier in a department store. I remember
> the multipart forms separated by carbon paper, and the swipe mechanical
> device that took the impression of the embossed account number on the
> face of the credit card. This is why credit cards are still embossed to
> this day as these impression machines can still be used with failure of
> communication.

Not now in the UK (and probably not in the rest of Europe). My latest
credit card, issued about 18 months ago, has no embossed numbers. The
numbers are just printed on the back of the card. There is still a
magnetic stripe.

> Europeans authorize the purchase with a PIN. In America, it was
> authorized with a signature, but it's not like the cashier had a
> signature available for comparison. These days, it's quite common for
> merchants to tell the purchaser not to sign.

For contactless purchases up to £100, there is no PIN confirmation
required. However, if there are more than three uses within a day, PIN
confirmation is usually required.

> Then it took a few more years for banks to issue NFC credit cards, in
> which the card has an EMV chip and RFID array to be read at a touch
> terminal that doesn't require the card to be inserted. My NFC credit
> card almost never works with NFC readers, so I insert the chip anyway.

The only problem I have with contactless transactions is with the
non-standard position of the NFC receiver. They can be within the LCD
screen, above it, or even on the "top"! Why the industry can't
standardise it in one place is beyond me.

--

Jeff

[suzeeq]

Yep, my last replacement cards have skipped the embossing and the
numbers are on the back. Has a strip and chip.

[B00ze]

On 2023-06-06 05:19, Chris Schram wrote:
> On 2023-06-06, Jeff Layman <Je...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> On 06/06/2023 09:38, Ed Cryer wrote:
>>> I've been using AIOE as backup for ES for years, so I registered with
>>> Solani as a replacement.
>>> First impressions look good.
>>> Doe anyone know who runs it, where and when?
>>
>> I've been using Solani as a backup to E-S for about 3 years (since
>> Albasani went). It has been very reliable, although I hardly use it.
>> It's based in Germany.
>
> I have been trying for about four days and no joy trying to register at
> solani.org. I'd like to think it's not personal, but maybe a huge
> backlog of aioe refugees.

I registered yesterday and have not received the promised email with
credentials :-(

--
! _\|/_ Sylvain / B00...@hotmail.com
! (o o) Member:David-Suzuki-Fdn/EFF/Red+Cross/SPCA/Planetary-Society

oO-( )-Oo CAPITALISM: Man exploiting man. SOCIALISM: The reverse.

[Adam H. Kerman]

suzeeq <su...@imbris.com> wrote:

>>. . .

>Yep, my last replacement cards have skipped the embossing and the
>numbers are on the back. Has a strip and chip.

I believe the numbers are on the back so the cashier can look at the
account number and signature at the same time, not that any cashier has
ever compared the signature.

[suzeeq]

A cashier doesn't see them, the card goes right into the machine. At
least at the stores I use it at. I suppose restaurants look, but my
cards aren't signed.

[Sn!pe]

Sn!pe <snip...@gmail.com> wrote:
[...]

> > > I've been using Solani as a backup to E-S for about 3 years (since
> > > Albasani went). It has been very reliable, although I hardly use it.
> > > It's based in Germany.
> >
> > I have been trying for about four days and no joy trying to register at
> > solani.org. I'd like to think it's not personal, but maybe a huge
> > backlog of aioe refugees.
>
> I've had Solani as a backup for some time. Having just tested it,
> I find that I can't log in. I suspect it is simply that my account has
> expired for lack of use so I've just re-registered at:
> <https://www.solani.org/register/>
> and I expect to hear by email shortly that I have new credentials.
> I'll report back.

I've just received (at 08:11 BST) new credentials to access Solani.

[Chris Schram]

On 2023-06-08, B00ze <B00...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On 2023-06-06 05:19, Chris Schram wrote:
>> On 2023-06-06, Jeff Layman <Je...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 06/06/2023 09:38, Ed Cryer wrote:
>>>> I've been using AIOE as backup for ES for years, so I registered with
>>>> Solani as a replacement.
>>>> First impressions look good.
>>>> Doe anyone know who runs it, where and when?
>>>
>>> I've been using Solani as a backup to E-S for about 3 years (since
>>> Albasani went). It has been very reliable, although I hardly use it.
>>> It's based in Germany.
>>
>> I have been trying for about four days and no joy trying to register at
>> solani.org. I'd like to think it's not personal, but maybe a huge
>> backlog of aioe refugees.
>
> I registered yesterday and have not received the promised email with
> credentials :-(

My original registration attempt last week went unanswered, as did my
query to the admins.

I tried to register again yesterday, and got a reply back in about
half-an-hour. So keep trying, I guess.

[Daniel65]

s|b wrote on 7/6/23 10:34 pm:

> On Mon, 5 Jun 2023 15:40:47 -0000 (UTC), A. Dumas wrote:
>

>> Utter nonsense. "Card refused" for visa or other credit cards isn't
>> even possible
>

> Do you know the meaning of the word "probably"? I've never owned a
> credit card, IOW I was guessing.
>

Today Australia's Federal Treasurer announced that Cheques (those paper
things of old!!) are to be phased out by 2030 .... so I guess I'll have
to use the last three in my cheque book (which I haven't used in
probably 25 years!!) sometime soon. ;-)
--
Daniel

[Jon Ribbens]

They're not "of old" in the United States of Victorian Banking.

[Bobbie Sellers]

No the USA has never used Cheques. We have honored those from
reputable institutions of course but we use Checks exclusively here.
Except when we use chedk cards, debit cards or credit cards.

bliss - momentarily solvent in a sea of debt.

[A. Dumas]

Adam H. Kerman <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
> Andy Burns <use...@andyburns.uk> wrote:
>> Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>> Bank card numbers are 20 digits long in Europe
>
>> all mine (UK) are 16 digits, and always have been.
>
> Fair enough. I thought Europe had made this transition.

Europe uses IBAN since 2006/2007 for international payments. Some countries
were faster than others to implement it for the domestic systems. By 2014,
all EU countries had fully switched (so including the UK). There is no
fixed width! Differs per country:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Bank_Account_Number

[Adam H. Kerman]

Business Law 101: Checks are negotiable instrument, a bill of exchange,
a written order to make payment to the payee.

Banks hated checks because they had to be collected and trucked. It
became convenient to use a Federal Reserve Bank or branch as the
transload or even sorting facility among banks. Cancelled checks were
then mailed to the holder of the account it was drawn upon.

Today, since the Check 21 Act of 2003 took effect, checks are generally
imaged and destroyed at the first opportunity.

Banks hate paying for anything, so this was great for their business,
saving massive amounts of money for shipping and mailing.

It truly sucks for the poor sap who wrote the check and has to sue for
contract performance if the other party to the contract claims he was
never paid. A check is an original document and therefore better
evidence than any recreated document.

Similarly, it sucks for the consumer who receives a dunning notice from
a merchant or service provider to prove that he had written the check.

Allegedly, everybody hates paper records and there are associated
storage costs, but nothing beats an original paper document as evidence
in court. You don't need it till you truly do need to produce it.

The other nice thing about a check is that anyone with a bank account can
receive one. In a very small service business or self-employed individual
or small nonprofit or hobbyist or just someone selling his own possessions
no longer needed, there can be high startup costs to set up the receipt
of electronic payments or to receive credit card payments for transactions
that are few and far between. Checks are more convenient in these cases.

Anyone with a bank account can receive an ACH, but explain that to the
person who has never used this before. Anyone cna write a check.

[Adam H. Kerman]

That's irrelevant to what we are discussion. IBAN is for SWIFT.

We were discussing account numbers for bank cards: credit cards and
debit cards.

[Jon Ribbens]

America truly is on a different planet.

[Adam H. Kerman]

Does recreated evidence have a different evidentiary value in courts
outside the United States, or is there simply no need for courts to
enforce business contracts?

Do explain.

[Jon Ribbens]

We don't use cheques (or checks), so the question does not arise in
that context. The whole concept of "the cheque's in the post" or
"the signature on the check is forged" are archaic nonsense from the
distant past, as is everything you said about cheques being universal,
or there being setup costs associated with electronic payments.

[B00ze]

On 2023-06-08 06:26, Chris Schram wrote:
> On 2023-06-08, B00ze <B00...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On 2023-06-06 05:19, Chris Schram wrote:
>>> On 2023-06-06, Jeff Layman <Je...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On 06/06/2023 09:38, Ed Cryer wrote:
>>>>> I've been using AIOE as backup for ES for years, so I registered with
>>>>> Solani as a replacement.
>>>>> First impressions look good.
>>>>> Doe anyone know who runs it, where and when?
>>>>
>>>> I've been using Solani as a backup to E-S for about 3 years (since
>>>> Albasani went). It has been very reliable, although I hardly use it.
>>>> It's based in Germany.
>>>
>>> I have been trying for about four days and no joy trying to register at
>>> solani.org. I'd like to think it's not personal, but maybe a huge
>>> backlog of aioe refugees.
>>
>> I registered yesterday and have not received the promised email with
>> credentials :-(
>
> My original registration attempt last week went unanswered, as did my
> query to the admins.
>
> I tried to register again yesterday, and got a reply back in about
> half-an-hour. So keep trying, I guess.

I got the email today, woohoo :)

--
! _\|/_ Sylvain / B00...@hotmail.com
! (o o) Member:David-Suzuki-Fdn/EFF/Red+Cross/SPCA/Planetary-Society

oO-( )-Oo Q-TIP: Advice from The Continuum - (For your ears only)

[The Real Bev]

On 6/8/23 6:33 PM, Jon Ribbens wrote:

> We don't use cheques (or checks), so the question does not arise in
> that context. The whole concept of "the cheque's in the post" or
> "the signature on the check is forged" are archaic nonsense from the
> distant past, as is everything you said about cheques being universal,
> or there being setup costs associated with electronic payments.

The only thing I use checks for now is paying taxes. The State of
Kalifornia charges money to file electronically, so screw 'em -- they
can spend whatever extra it costs them to process 3 ounces of paper.

TurboTax screwed up the electronic filing one year, so from then on I
used HRBlock and continued to snail-mail paper and checks.

--
Cheers, Bev
=====================================================================
If violence isn't solving the problem, you're not using enough of it.

[Adam H. Kerman]

If I want to receive credit card payments, I'd have to pay at least 2.5%
and it would probably be 4.5%. Plus a monthly minimum. If I don't have
the means to authorize the transaction with the banking system, like a
stall at a street fair, I'd pay 6%. However there are devices to attach
to smart phones with chip readers, with an app on the smart phone, that
will authorize the transaction if I can get a signal.

Some restaurants will buy hand-held battery powered terminals to authorize
transactions and will print receipts. I guess they work on Wifi.

I'm so glad that transaction costs are much lower where you live.

I need to write business checks. I don't write terribly many personal
checks, mostly to small organizations I belong to or if I have to
reimburse someone. You want me to have someone set up electronic payment
system to receive a reimbursement from me? Insist they set up Paypal?

ACH is universal but I'd need to be told account numbers.

[Adam H. Kerman]

The Real Bev <bashl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 6/8/23 6:33 PM, Jon Ribbens wrote:
>
>> We don't use cheques (or checks), so the question does not arise in
>> that context. The whole concept of "the cheque's in the post" or
>> "the signature on the check is forged" are archaic nonsense from the
>> distant past, as is everything you said about cheques being universal,
>> or there being setup costs associated with electronic payments.
>
>The only thing I use checks for now is paying taxes. The State of
>Kalifornia charges money to file electronically, so screw 'em -- they
>can spend whatever extra it costs them to process 3 ounces of paper.
>
>TurboTax screwed up the electronic filing one year, so from then on I
>used HRBlock and continued to snail-mail paper and checks.

With a certified mail receipt

I always use certified mail to communication with revenuers because I
have to prove timeliness.

[The Real Bev]

On 6/8/23 9:10 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> The Real Bev <bashl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>On 6/8/23 6:33 PM, Jon Ribbens wrote:
>>
>>> We don't use cheques (or checks), so the question does not arise in
>>> that context. The whole concept of "the cheque's in the post" or
>>> "the signature on the check is forged" are archaic nonsense from the
>>> distant past, as is everything you said about cheques being universal,
>>> or there being setup costs associated with electronic payments.
>>
>>The only thing I use checks for now is paying taxes. The State of
>>Kalifornia charges money to file electronically, so screw 'em -- they
>>can spend whatever extra it costs them to process 3 ounces of paper.
>>
>>TurboTax screwed up the electronic filing one year, so from then on I
>>used HRBlock and continued to snail-mail paper and checks.
>
> With a certified mail receipt

Last year the bastards lost it internally for several months and charged
me a penalty and interest. I had photographed all 6 addressed stamped
envelopes and sent them a copy of that. They had cashed the other
check. I told them that in 60 years of paying taxes their records will
show that I was NEVER late and I would appreciate an explanation of why
I might have sent those other envelopes but not the one in question.

They forgave the penalty but insisted that I pay the $20 or so interest.
It wasn't worth trying to fight over $20, but I deeply resent having
to bribe the USPS to do their job. I did it for one envelope (this year
they didn't insist that the check be sent to a separate address from the
1040) but I we shouldn't have to do that. I took pictures of all the
envelopes right in front of the USPS mail slot this time, but everything
went through properly.

Glad the additional funding for the IRS was decreased. The bastards
don't deserve any more.

> I always use certified mail to communication with revenuers because I
> have to prove timeliness.

I can't see why a dated photo of me and the envelopes and the post
office employees wouldn't be acceptable.

--
Cheers, Bev
Some people are like Slinkies... Not really good for
anything, but they still bring a smile to your face
when you push them down a flight of stairs.

[A. Dumas]

It is relevant because the IBAN number is the "bank card number", it's
what is printed on bank (debit) cards. Not credit cards, that's separate.

[Anton Ertl]

"Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> writes:
>Does recreated evidence have a different evidentiary value in courts
>outside the United States, or is there simply no need for courts to
>enforce business contracts?

The way it used to work here (AFAIK, I have never needed to prove it
in court) is that you filled out the money transfer form, went to the
bank, the bank kept one copy of it, and you kept the other copy, with
the stamp from the bank (with date and time), and that was your proof
that you had sent the money on time.

Later the banks managed to get rid of the responsibility of processing
the transfer correctly, so the stamp then only said that you had
submitted the form, and the proof of the actual payment is in the bank
statement. But at least you still had the stamped form to prove that
you tried.

Nowadays most people use electronic banking, so the bank statement
becomes the only evidence (you can do screenshots, but will they count
in court?); however, with electronic banking the frequency of screwups
by the bank (e.g., a mistake when typing in or scanning the target
account number or money amount) is hopefully smaller.

Reading the stories about checks, money transfers have the advantage
of having a third party who records the transaction. With checks
you can do that by paying for a certified mail receipt.

- anton
--
M. Anton Ertl Some things have to be seen to be believed
an...@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at Most things have to be believed to be seen
http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/home.html

[Jeff]

>>> Today Australia's Federal Treasurer announced that Cheques (those paper
>>> things of old!!) are to be phased out by 2030 .... so I guess I'll have
>>> to use the last three in my cheque book (which I haven't used in
>>> probably 25 years!!) sometime soon. ;-)
>>
>> They're not "of old" in the United States of Victorian Banking.
>
>     No the USA has never used Cheques.

Yes they have, but just could not spell it correctly ((:-).

Jeff

[Jeff]

My a/c 's IBAN number bears no relationship whatsoever to what is on my
debit card.

My debit card as a 12 digit number (broken down into 4 groups of 4).
which is the number that everyone wants when making an on line
transaction. None of these appear in my a/c's IBAN.
The card also has my branch sort code and my real a/c number, but again
neither of these appear in the IBAN.

Jeff

[A. Dumas]

OK! Apparently I didn't read my own link close enough, or failed to draw
the right conclusions from the structural description (honestly I
skimmed most of the page, just looked for years). I'm in The Netherlands
and my old bank account number that I had for 50 years is incorporated
whole into the new IBAN; I thought that was how it worked everywhere. Sorry!

Quote:
-------------
Structure
The IBAN consists of up to 34 alphanumeric characters, as follows:
country code using ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 – two letters,
check digits – two digits, and
Basic Bank Account Number (BBAN) – up to 30 alphanumeric characters that
are country-specific.
[...]
Basic Bank Account Number
The Basic Bank Account Number (BBAN) format is decided by the national
central bank or designated payment authority of each country. There is
no consistency between the formats adopted. The national authority may
register its BBAN format with SWIFT but is not obliged to do so. It may
adopt IBAN without registration. SWIFT also acts as the registration
authority for the SWIFT system, which is used by most countries that
have not adopted IBAN. A major difference between the two systems is
that under SWIFT there is no requirement that BBANs used within a
country be of a pre-defined length.

The BBAN must be of a fixed length for the country and comprise
case-insensitive alphanumeric characters. It includes the domestic bank
account number, branch identifier, and potential routing information.
Each country can have a different national routing/account numbering
system, up to a maximum of 30 alphanumeric characters.

[Jon Ribbens]

On 2023-06-09, Adam H. Kerman <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
> Jon Ribbens <jon+u...@unequivocal.eu> wrote:
>>On 2023-06-09, Adam H. Kerman <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>>We don't use cheques (or checks), so the question does not arise in
>>that context. The whole concept of "the cheque's in the post" or
>>"the signature on the check is forged" are archaic nonsense from the
>>distant past, as is everything you said about cheques being universal,
>>or there being setup costs associated with electronic payments.
>
> If I want to receive credit card payments, I'd have to pay at least 2.5%
> and it would probably be 4.5%. Plus a monthly minimum. If I don't have
> the means to authorize the transaction with the banking system, like a
> stall at a street fair, I'd pay 6%. However there are devices to attach
> to smart phones with chip readers, with an app on the smart phone, that
> will authorize the transaction if I can get a signal.
>
> Some restaurants will buy hand-held battery powered terminals to authorize
> transactions and will print receipts. I guess they work on Wifi.

Those machines are absolutely universal in the UK and most/all of
Europe. In the UK, "Chip and PIN" has been essentially mandatory
since February 2005.

> I'm so glad that transaction costs are much lower where you live.

Yeah, we pay <1.5% on card transactions.

> I need to write business checks. I don't write terribly many personal
> checks, mostly to small organizations I belong to or if I have to
> reimburse someone. You want me to have someone set up electronic payment
> system to receive a reimbursement from me? Insist they set up Paypal?

See, this is what I mean! "I need to write business checks" or "have
someone set up electronic payment" are like someone talking moon
language. If you have a bank account, you can accept and send electronic
payments. I haven't written a cheque (personal or business) for decades.
The only cheques I have received in the last twenty years are from US
(or Canadian) companies - or the tax man, sigh (although usually the tax
man receives or pays electronically too). And electronic payments turn
up in the receipient's account within seconds (unless they're seven
figures or more).

> ACH is universal but I'd need to be told account numbers.

They're on the invoices...

[Jon Ribbens]

I must admit I did wonder vaguely if the USA did use "cheques" before
Webster first published his dictionary in 1828.

[Jon Ribbens]

What? No it isn't. It *can't* be, because an IBAN is an alphanumeric
string up to 34 characters, and a card PAN (the long number that used
to be embossed on the front) is all-numeric 19 digits or fewer.

[Bit Twister]

On Thu, 8 Jun 2023 20:35:28 -0700, The Real Bev wrote:
> On 6/8/23 6:33 PM, Jon Ribbens wrote:
>
>> We don't use cheques (or checks), so the question does not arise in
>> that context. The whole concept of "the cheque's in the post" or
>> "the signature on the check is forged" are archaic nonsense from the
>> distant past, as is everything you said about cheques being universal,
>> or there being setup costs associated with electronic payments.
>
> The only thing I use checks for now is paying taxes. The State of
> Kalifornia charges money to file electronically, so screw 'em -- they
> can spend whatever extra it costs them to process 3 ounces of paper.
>
> TurboTax screwed up the electronic filing one year, so from then on I
> used HRBlock and continued to snail-mail paper and checks.

Despised TurboTax cost increase to get their stock irs reporting addon.
Switched to HRBlock for last few years. Guessing USA congress looking into tax software
steering customers to pay for electric filing has helped.

Got a prompt for free electronic filing. Accepted it and later was able to
amend the filing.

Also created an account at https://referee.id.me/ so I can get into/have
account at IRS. Really liking being able to make payments for quarterly tax estimates and
yearly tax bill on-line and not spending time in post office lines.

[Adam H. Kerman]

The Real Bev <bashl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 6/8/23 9:10 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>The Real Bev <bashl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>On 6/8/23 6:33 PM, Jon Ribbens wrote:

>>>>We don't use cheques (or checks), so the question does not arise in
>>>>that context. The whole concept of "the cheque's in the post" or
>>>>"the signature on the check is forged" are archaic nonsense from the
>>>>distant past, as is everything you said about cheques being universal,
>>>>or there being setup costs associated with electronic payments.

>>>The only thing I use checks for now is paying taxes. The State of
>>>Kalifornia charges money to file electronically, so screw 'em -- they
>>>can spend whatever extra it costs them to process 3 ounces of paper.

>>>TurboTax screwed up the electronic filing one year, so from then on I
>>>used HRBlock and continued to snail-mail paper and checks.

>>With a certified mail receipt

>Last year the bastards lost it internally for several months and charged
>me a penalty and interest. I had photographed all 6 addressed stamped
>envelopes and sent them a copy of that. They had cashed the other
>check. I told them that in 60 years of paying taxes their records will
>show that I was NEVER late and I would appreciate an explanation of why
>I might have sent those other envelopes but not the one in question.

>They forgave the penalty but insisted that I pay the $20 or so interest.

The penalty is administrative, so they have more flexibility in abating
that. Interest is statutory. It turns out the notes I include on tax
forms aren't often read as I had a situation in which IRS took so long
to process a return for one year during the pandemic shutdown that it
was after the processed the return for the next year. Given the pandemic
tax relief, there was enough of a tax refund to apply to two subsequent
years. Instead of applying the refund to next year's tax as instructed,
IRS refunded it resulting in tax underpayments for two years.

No penalties but there is interest. Of course it's a waste of time to
deal with but I had to deal with it regardless because paying interest
for one year doesn't make the problem go away for the following year.

Form 843 is narrative and it is sent to whichever IRS district processed
the tax return, which isn't necessarily the same district in which it's
filed.

Now that I know about that form, perhaps I'll include it with future tax
returns if an explanation about why taxes were paid late is necessary
and not bother to write the note that gets ignored on the tax return.

> It wasn't worth trying to fight over $20, but I deeply resent having
>to bribe the USPS to do their job. I did it for one envelope (this year
>they didn't insist that the check be sent to a separate address from the
>1040) but I we shouldn't have to do that. I took pictures of all the
>envelopes right in front of the USPS mail slot this time, but everything
>went through properly.

>Glad the additional funding for the IRS was decreased. The bastards
>don't deserve any more.

IRS promised that the funding would be used to hire staff for the call
centers that taxpayers interact with. IRS is very short staffed in these
call centers. After a two-hour hold, this needs to be dealt with. The
Republicans in Congress could have written that the hiring would be for
call centers into law.

>>I always use certified mail to communication with revenuers because I
>>have to prove timeliness.

>I can't see why a dated photo of me and the envelopes and the post
>office employees wouldn't be acceptable.

A selfie!

[Adam H. Kerman]

Jon Ribbens <jon+u...@unequivocal.eu> wrote:
>On 2023-06-09, Adam H. Kerman <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>>Jon Ribbens <jon+u...@unequivocal.eu> wrote:
>>>On 2023-06-09, Adam H. Kerman <a...@chinet.com> wrote:

>>>We don't use cheques (or checks), so the question does not arise in
>>>that context. The whole concept of "the cheque's in the post" or
>>>"the signature on the check is forged" are archaic nonsense from the
>>>distant past, as is everything you said about cheques being universal,
>>>or there being setup costs associated with electronic payments.

>>If I want to receive credit card payments, I'd have to pay at least 2.5%
>>and it would probably be 4.5%. Plus a monthly minimum. If I don't have
>>the means to authorize the transaction with the banking system, like a
>>stall at a street fair, I'd pay 6%. However there are devices to attach
>>to smart phones with chip readers, with an app on the smart phone, that
>>will authorize the transaction if I can get a signal.

>>Some restaurants will buy hand-held battery powered terminals to authorize
>>transactions and will print receipts. I guess they work on Wifi.

>Those machines are absolutely universal in the UK and most/all of
>Europe. In the UK, "Chip and PIN" has been essentially mandatory
>since February 2005.

I'm aware of that. But that's just the accident of the US modernizing
first with the widely deployed magnetic stripe readers built into very
expensive cash registers and gas pumps. Europe didn't have this kind of
wide deployment. That fraud with magnetic stripes was well known in the
United States, MasterCard and Visa came up with the chipped cards in
Europe, which took more than a decade to become widely used in the
United States.

>>I'm so glad that transaction costs are much lower where you live.

>Yeah, we pay <1.5% on card transactions.

That's incredible. Your banks must have shitty lobbyists.

>>I need to write business checks. I don't write terribly many personal
>>checks, mostly to small organizations I belong to or if I have to
>>reimburse someone. You want me to have someone set up electronic payment
>>system to receive a reimbursement from me? Insist they set up Paypal?

>See, this is what I mean! "I need to write business checks" or "have
>someone set up electronic payment" are like someone talking moon
>language. If you have a bank account, you can accept and send electronic
>payments.

I can accept ACH, the long-standing electronic payment system, but both
parties must be familiar with it and there has to be an exchange of
account numbers.

>I haven't written a cheque (personal or business) for decades.
>The only cheques I have received in the last twenty years are from US
>(or Canadian) companies - or the tax man, sigh (although usually the tax
>man receives or pays electronically too). And electronic payments turn
>up in the receipient's account within seconds (unless they're seven
>figures or more).

State and federal tax departments have accepted electronic payments for
a very long time. It costs them less money to accept an electronic
payment but they pass processing fees along to the taxpayer. The monies
also clear sooner, like overnight.

With a paper check, there's float for a few days, or a week or more if
the post office is inefficient.

As a taxpayer, why exactly do I want to make tax collection easier for
the government? They will be the last place I continue to write paper
checks to until the law is changed to refuse to accept paper checks.
Then I'll switch to paying taxes in person, in pennies.

>>ACH is universal but I'd need to be told account numbers.

>They're on the invoices...

I understand that. I'm still not sure that's not a security risk.

Other people mentioned that banks in Europe had converted all account
numbers to IBAN, the international format. Does that mean all interbank
transactions even for amounts as small as an individual paying a utility
bill are handled via SWIFT, or is there a separate clearing house for
the very small amounts a consumer would pay? Obvious ACH (automated
clearing house network) is domestic within the United States. I don't
think any foreign banks belong to the network. Anti-fraud proceedures
may delay clearance by a few days but the vast majority of transactions
clear by the end of the day, if not within minutes.

[Adam H. Kerman]

Anton Ertl <an...@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> wrote:
>"Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> writes:

>>Does recreated evidence have a different evidentiary value in courts
>>outside the United States, or is there simply no need for courts to
>>enforce business contracts?

>The way it used to work here (AFAIK, I have never needed to prove it
>in court) is that you filled out the money transfer form, went to the
>bank, the bank kept one copy of it, and you kept the other copy, with
>the stamp from the bank (with date and time), and that was your proof
>that you had sent the money on time.

Ah. A bank draft.

>Later the banks managed to get rid of the responsibility of processing
>the transfer correctly, so the stamp then only said that you had
>submitted the form, and the proof of the actual payment is in the bank
>statement. But at least you still had the stamped form to prove that
>you tried.

Wow. The banks accepted no responsibility for doing their job correctly.
Yeah, that sounds like a bank.

>Nowadays most people use electronic banking, so the bank statement
>becomes the only evidence (you can do screenshots, but will they count
>in court?); however, with electronic banking the frequency of screwups
>by the bank (e.g., a mistake when typing in or scanning the target
>account number or money amount) is hopefully smaller.

In some industries, say Hollywood, the people doing business with each
other live to screw with each other for the sake of screwing with each
other. They sue each other constantly for contract performance in
situations in which wouldn't arise so commonly in other industries. The
payor typically needs proof that would stand up in court that he paid,
given how likely the other party might lie.

>Reading the stories about checks, money transfers have the advantage
>of having a third party who records the transaction. With checks
>you can do that by paying for a certified mail receipt.

That's how I pay taxes!

[Adam H. Kerman]

In the United States, the debit card number uses a reserved sequences of
account numbers within the credit card numbering system. The bank
account it represents is never printed on the card itself.

It sounds like in Europe, debit card transactions are cleared through a
different network. One of you will still have to tell me if these
transactions are all cleared through SWIFT or if there is another
network that clears very small transactions a consumer might use.

In the United States, the transactions are cleared through the credit
card clearing processing network.

[Adam H. Kerman]

American spelling of vast numbers of English words was simplified around
the time of the Revolutionary War.

[Anton Ertl]

"Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> writes:
>Anton Ertl <an...@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> wrote:
>>"Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> writes:
>
>>>Does recreated evidence have a different evidentiary value in courts
>>>outside the United States, or is there simply no need for courts to
>>>enforce business contracts?
>
>>The way it used to work here (AFAIK, I have never needed to prove it
>>in court) is that you filled out the money transfer form, went to the
>>bank, the bank kept one copy of it, and you kept the other copy, with
>>the stamp from the bank (with date and time), and that was your proof
>>that you had sent the money on time.
>
>Ah. A bank draft.

No (at least not what I get when I look for "bank draft", which is: "a
cheque which you can buy from a bank in order to pay someone who is
not willing to accept a personal cheque").

For a money transfer the form says that I, owner of account A want to
transfer the amount M to account B. I give this to my bank (where
account A is), and account B may be at a different bank.

There are also other ways to pay, e.g., SEPA direct debit (which many
use for regular payments of changing amounts), or paying cash into
account B (but banks charged so much for that last time I used it that
I have not used it for two decades or so; I think it's cheaper (or
free) if you go to B's bank).

[Jon Ribbens]

On 2023-06-09, Anton Ertl <an...@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> wrote:
> "Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> writes:
>>Anton Ertl <an...@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> wrote:
>>>"Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> writes:
>>
>>>>Does recreated evidence have a different evidentiary value in courts
>>>>outside the United States, or is there simply no need for courts to
>>>>enforce business contracts?
>>
>>>The way it used to work here (AFAIK, I have never needed to prove it
>>>in court) is that you filled out the money transfer form, went to the
>>>bank, the bank kept one copy of it, and you kept the other copy, with
>>>the stamp from the bank (with date and time), and that was your proof
>>>that you had sent the money on time.
>>
>>Ah. A bank draft.
>
> No (at least not what I get when I look for "bank draft", which is: "a
> cheque which you can buy from a bank in order to pay someone who is
> not willing to accept a personal cheque").

Yeah a bank draft is a cheque payable on the bank's account rather than
your own. People think they're as good as cash, because it doesn't
occur to them that the bank itself might not have enough money.

> For a money transfer the form says that I, owner of account A want to
> transfer the amount M to account B. I give this to my bank (where
> account A is), and account B may be at a different bank.

I remember using one of those once, in around 1996. It was for sending
some money to the USA. The form had all sorts of exciting things on,
like did I want the courier to require a secret passphrase from the
recipient, and did I want the briefcase of cash to be handcuffed to
them or not... but sadly the latter option was only permitted if I
had been sending *considerably* more money than I was.

[Adam H. Kerman]

Anton Ertl <an...@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> wrote:
>"Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> writes:
>>Anton Ertl <an...@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> wrote:
>>>"Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> writes:

>>>>Does recreated evidence have a different evidentiary value in courts
>>>>outside the United States, or is there simply no need for courts to
>>>>enforce business contracts?

>>>The way it used to work here (AFAIK, I have never needed to prove it
>>>in court) is that you filled out the money transfer form, went to the
>>>bank, the bank kept one copy of it, and you kept the other copy, with
>>>the stamp from the bank (with date and time), and that was your proof
>>>that you had sent the money on time.

>>Ah. A bank draft.

>No (at least not what I get when I look for "bank draft", which is: "a
>cheque which you can buy from a bank in order to pay someone who is
>not willing to accept a personal cheque").

Sorry. A bank draft is guaranteed by the bank it's drawn upon.

>. . .

[Adam H. Kerman]

Did you have the option of transferring money in specie? You'd need a
courrier capable of lifting much heavier objects.

[Jon Ribbens]

On 2023-06-09, Adam H. Kerman <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
> Jon Ribbens <jon+u...@unequivocal.eu> wrote:
>>On 2023-06-09, Adam H. Kerman <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>>>Jon Ribbens <jon+u...@unequivocal.eu> wrote:
>>>>On 2023-06-09, Adam H. Kerman <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>
>>>>We don't use cheques (or checks), so the question does not arise in
>>>>that context. The whole concept of "the cheque's in the post" or
>>>>"the signature on the check is forged" are archaic nonsense from the
>>>>distant past, as is everything you said about cheques being universal,
>>>>or there being setup costs associated with electronic payments.
>
>>>If I want to receive credit card payments, I'd have to pay at least 2.5%
>>>and it would probably be 4.5%. Plus a monthly minimum. If I don't have
>>>the means to authorize the transaction with the banking system, like a
>>>stall at a street fair, I'd pay 6%. However there are devices to attach
>>>to smart phones with chip readers, with an app on the smart phone, that
>>>will authorize the transaction if I can get a signal.
>
>>>Some restaurants will buy hand-held battery powered terminals to authorize
>>>transactions and will print receipts. I guess they work on Wifi.
>
>>Those machines are absolutely universal in the UK and most/all of
>>Europe. In the UK, "Chip and PIN" has been essentially mandatory
>>since February 2005.
>
> I'm aware of that. But that's just the accident of the US modernizing
> first with the widely deployed magnetic stripe readers built into very
> expensive cash registers and gas pumps.

Hah. Don't get me started on American petrol pumps. I went to a petrol
station in Florida, the pump didn't work. I asked the cashier, he said
I had to pay first - so I said I wanted to fill up the car. He asked
me how much that would be... yet again, moon language. He wanted *me*
to guess what number *his* pump would display after filling up the
car. I looked around to see if someone was recording us as a prank,
but apparently not. I think in the end I had to settle for putting in
a completely random amount of petrol and not succeeding in filling up
the tank.

> Europe didn't have this kind of wide deployment. That fraud with
> magnetic stripes was well known in the United States, MasterCard and
> Visa came up with the chipped cards in Europe, which took more than a
> decade to become widely used in the United States.

The interesting thing about the introduction of Chip and PIN was that
every statement they made about it was false. And for some reason they
didn't mention that the purpose was much less about fraud reduction and
much more about shifting the liability for fraud from the banks to the
customers.

>>>I'm so glad that transaction costs are much lower where you live.
>
>>Yeah, we pay <1.5% on card transactions.
>
> That's incredible. Your banks must have shitty lobbyists.

If it's good I expect it's down to the EU. It may well get worse now
the country's committed suicide-by-Brexit.

>>>I need to write business checks. I don't write terribly many personal
>>>checks, mostly to small organizations I belong to or if I have to
>>>reimburse someone. You want me to have someone set up electronic payment
>>>system to receive a reimbursement from me? Insist they set up Paypal?
>
>>See, this is what I mean! "I need to write business checks" or "have
>>someone set up electronic payment" are like someone talking moon
>>language. If you have a bank account, you can accept and send electronic
>>payments.
>
> I can accept ACH, the long-standing electronic payment system, but both
> parties must be familiar with it and there has to be an exchange of
> account numbers.
>
>>I haven't written a cheque (personal or business) for decades.
>>The only cheques I have received in the last twenty years are from US
>>(or Canadian) companies - or the tax man, sigh (although usually the tax
>>man receives or pays electronically too). And electronic payments turn
>>up in the receipient's account within seconds (unless they're seven
>>figures or more).
>
> State and federal tax departments have accepted electronic payments for
> a very long time. It costs them less money to accept an electronic
> payment but they pass processing fees along to the taxpayer. The monies
> also clear sooner, like overnight.

Weird. Here, things tend to cost more if you pay other than
electronically (because, as you say, it costs them more). Even the
deadline for filing taxes is three months earlier if you're doing
it on paper rather than electronically.

> With a paper check, there's float for a few days, or a week or more if
> the post office is inefficient.
>
> As a taxpayer, why exactly do I want to make tax collection easier for
> the government?

Because, as a taxpayer, it's your own money you're wasting?

> They will be the last place I continue to write paper
> checks to until the law is changed to refuse to accept paper checks.
> Then I'll switch to paying taxes in person, in pennies.
>
>>>ACH is universal but I'd need to be told account numbers.
>
>>They're on the invoices...
>
> I understand that. I'm still not sure that's not a security risk.

It's not really. But any accounts set up by large companies which will
be receiving large amounts of money (e.g. the account the tax man
receives all the tax payments into) will be set up so that all debits
are disallowed, and the balance is instead automatically transferred
to a different account whose number is not publicised.

> Other people mentioned that banks in Europe had converted all account
> numbers to IBAN, the international format.

That doesn't sound right. I'd maybe believe that all standard accounts
*have* an IBAN, but you don't generally use it for anything except
international payments.

> Does that mean all interbank transactions even for amounts as small as
> an individual paying a utility bill are handled via SWIFT, or is there
> a separate clearing house for the very small amounts a consumer would
> pay?

Payments within a country won't use SWIFT (which is quite expensive).
Indeed payments in Euros between European countries aren't likely to
use SWIFT either, but SEPA transfers (which, being an EU thing, have
very low charges that are mandated by law).

In the UK most consumer payments (other than direct debits) use a system
called "Faster Payments", which is usually instantaneous and free.

[Jon Ribbens]

On 2023-06-09, Adam H. Kerman <a...@chinet.com> wrote:

If that was an option then I imagine the fees would have been rather
more than I was prepared to pay.

[Bobbie Sellers]

But in Europe International payments are likely more frequent than in
the USA. So many nations from Turkey to Finland. I bet you
can order lots of products from an adjacent nation.

It is very difficult for the US citizens who want to donate to
a European organization so I gave up on donation to one outfit, Mageia
which publishes a cool distribution of Linux.

>
>> Does that mean all interbank transactions even for amounts as small as
>> an individual paying a utility bill are handled via SWIFT, or is there
>> a separate clearing house for the very small amounts a consumer would
>> pay?
>
> Payments within a country won't use SWIFT (which is quite expensive).
> Indeed payments in Euros between European countries aren't likely to
> use SWIFT either, but SEPA transfers (which, being an EU thing, have
> very low charges that are mandated by law).
>
> In the UK most consumer payments (other than direct debits) use a system
> called "Faster Payments", which is usually instantaneous and free.
>
>> Obvious ACH (automated clearing house network) is domestic within the
>> United States. I don't think any foreign banks belong to the network.

>> Anti-fraud procedures may delay clearance by a few days but the vast

>> majority of transactions clear by the end of the day, if not within
>> minutes.

bliss

--
bliss dash SF 4 ever at dslextreme dot com

[Jon Ribbens]

On 2023-06-09, Bobbie Sellers <bl...@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
> On 6/9/23 11:24, Jon Ribbens wrote:
>> On 2023-06-09, Adam H. Kerman <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>>> Other people mentioned that banks in Europe had converted all account
>>> numbers to IBAN, the international format.
>>
>> That doesn't sound right. I'd maybe believe that all standard accounts
>> *have* an IBAN, but you don't generally use it for anything except
>> international payments.
>
> But in Europe International payments are likely more frequent than in
> the USA. So many nations from Turkey to Finland. I bet you
> can order lots of products from an adjacent nation.

Indeed. A core aim of the European Union is to make it so that you can
order goods and services from any other EU country and it will be just
as easy as ordering from inside your own country - i.e. a level
playing field despite international borders.

> It is very difficult for the US citizens who want to donate to
> a European organization so I gave up on donation to one outfit, Mageia
> which publishes a cool distribution of Linux.

What do you mean? That organisation uses a PayPal donation form.
PayPal is an American company and the form accepts credit cards.
In what way was it difficult?

[Adam H. Kerman]

Jon Ribbens <jon+u...@unequivocal.eu> wrote:
>On 2023-06-09, Adam H. Kerman <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>>Jon Ribbens <jon+u...@unequivocal.eu> wrote:
>>>On 2023-06-09, Adam H. Kerman <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>>>>Jon Ribbens <jon+u...@unequivocal.eu> wrote:
>>>>>On 2023-06-09, Adam H. Kerman <a...@chinet.com> wrote:

>>. . .

>Hah. Don't get me started on American petrol pumps. I went to a petrol
>station in Florida, the pump didn't work. I asked the cashier, he said
>I had to pay first - so I said I wanted to fill up the car. He asked
>me how much that would be... yet again, moon language. He wanted *me*
>to guess what number *his* pump would display after filling up the
>car. I looked around to see if someone was recording us as a prank,
>but apparently not. I think in the end I had to settle for putting in
>a completely random amount of petrol and not succeeding in filling up
>the tank.

Drive offs are a serious problem. It's very difficult to find a gas
station that allows you to pay in arrears. You give them a cash deposit,
say $75 when prices are very high and you have a large tank, which they
hold, and then you return to the cashier to complete your transaction.

It's worse than you think. Let me tell you what happens with a credit
card. With a built-in credit card reader, the transaction is authorized
before you start pumping gas. In addition to the authorization, there is
a hold put on your account, which used to be $50 and now is probably
$100. This literally reduces your available credit. The hold is not
released once you have finished pumping gas, but when the gas station's
bank submits the charge to the network. On a weekday, it's overnight,
but on a weekend or holiday or when there are simply a lot of pending
transactions, it can take up to three days for the credit hold to be
released.

Now, this isn't a big deal for the credit card holder if he's not near
his credit limit, but if he is near the limit or if he's travelling and
incurring much higher chargest than normal, this can block access to
credit he needs to use till the hold is released.

>>Europe didn't have this kind of wide deployment. That fraud with
>>magnetic stripes was well known in the United States, MasterCard and
>>Visa came up with the chipped cards in Europe, which took more than a
>>decade to become widely used in the United States.

>The interesting thing about the introduction of Chip and PIN was that
>every statement they made about it was false. And for some reason they
>didn't mention that the purpose was much less about fraud reduction and
>much more about shifting the liability for fraud from the banks to the
>customers.

I'm shocked, I tell you, shocked.

In America, they've really twisted the arms of merchants to get every
transaction authorized with the difference in fees and the severe cost
of chargebacks to the merchant if fraud is suspected.

Now, if the transaction is authorized but the cardholder doesn't pay his
monthly statement, typically, there is no chargeback. But there can be a
chargeback in an unauthorized transaction if the cardholder does not pay
even if fraud has not been committed.

There is also some protection to the merchant in the case of an
authorized transaction that turns out to be fraudulent.

An "authorization", in this case, is from the credit card processing
network, not a literal guarantee of payment by the cardholder.

>>>. . .

>>State and federal tax departments have accepted electronic payments for
>>a very long time. It costs them less money to accept an electronic
>>payment but they pass processing fees along to the taxpayer. The monies
>>also clear sooner, like overnight.

>Weird. Here, things tend to cost more if you pay other than
>electronically (because, as you say, it costs them more). Even the
>deadline for filing taxes is three months earlier if you're doing
>it on paper rather than electronically.

It's quite simply. At the state or federal level, the state legislature
or Congress would have to authorize the tax collector to pay the
clearing fee out of proceeds of the taxes being collected or the
department's budget. Unless it's authorized in law or an appropriation,
the tax departments cannot pay these fees. That's why there's a
surcharge to the taxpayer to pay electronically.

It's not like the law changes in response to a business case to do
things in a different way.

Now the federal government and some states have set up their own
electronic payment acceptance without fees if it's a transaction from a
bank accout. If it's credit card, the fees may be surcharged to the
taxpayer. I don't actually know as I've never looked.

Tax refunds, however, have long had an ACH option, even when filing a
tax return on paper. There is a line to write in the bank routing number
and taxpayer's bank account number.

>>With a paper check, there's float for a few days, or a week or more if
>>the post office is inefficient.

>>As a taxpayer, why exactly do I want to make tax collection easier for
>>the government?

>Because, as a taxpayer, it's your own money you're wasting?

Government can always be counted on to introduce waste, fraud, abuse,
ineffective, and harm somewhere else in the system.

It makes me feel better even though I may have to stand in line at the
post office to get the certified mail receipt.

>>. . .

>>>>ACH is universal but I'd need to be told account numbers.

>>>They're on the invoices...

>>I understand that. I'm still not sure that's not a security risk.

>It's not really. But any accounts set up by large companies which will
>be receiving large amounts of money (e.g. the account the tax man
>receives all the tax payments into) will be set up so that all debits
>are disallowed, and the balance is instead automatically transferred
>to a different account whose number is not publicised.

Yes. I understand that. But if I were receiving ACH, it would be into a
working checking account given the tiny volume of transactions.

>>. . .

>Payments within a country won't use SWIFT (which is quite expensive).
>Indeed payments in Euros between European countries aren't likely to
>use SWIFT either, but SEPA transfers (which, being an EU thing, have
>very low charges that are mandated by law).

Thanks

>In the UK most consumer payments (other than direct debits) use a system
>called "Faster Payments", which is usually instantaneous and free.

Is there a per transaction and per day cap?

Thanks

>>. . .

[Anton Ertl]

Jon Ribbens <jon+u...@unequivocal.eu> writes:
>On 2023-06-09, Adam H. Kerman <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>> Other people mentioned that banks in Europe had converted all account
>> numbers to IBAN, the international format.
>
>That doesn't sound right. I'd maybe believe that all standard accounts
>*have* an IBAN, but you don't generally use it for anything except
>international payments.

For several years now, maybe a decade, the transfer forms we use in
Austria require the IBAN of sender and recipient of the payment. The
form also has a field for the BIC (for identifying the recipient bank,
although AFAIK the IBAN already contains that information), but that's
only needed for international payments. As a result, I can use the
same form for payments within Austria and to elsewhere in the Euro
zone.

[Jon Ribbens]

The system has a £1,000,000 per transaction limit. Many banks have
lower per-transaction and per-day limits, which depend on what type
of account you're using, but we're still talking tens of thousands.
If you want to send a larger electronic payment then you'd use CHAPS,
which is comparatively expensive (say £20) but then who cares when
you're sending a huge transfer...

[Anton Ertl]

I have never seen these options. I remember that sending money abroad
(including, e.g., the USA) through the postal system was not
particularly expensive in the 1980s (like ATS 15 ~ USD 1.5 for sending
to an account; I also remember ATS 35 for sending to an address), then
we entered the EU, and "because of the EU" the same thing got
significantly more expensive (IIRC ATS 60 for sending to an account),
and no longer worked for sending to the USA.

I then had to use my bank to send money to the USA, and the bank
personell asked me who pays the charges on each side, and the expected
cost was maybe ATS 400 (but you never knew beforehand if you payed the
receiver's charges); eventuelly I learned that the best option was
that each side pays their own charges, and then the cost was ok.

But OTOH, after some years (around the time when the Euro was
introduced) sending money within the EU became as cheap and almost as
easy as sending money within Austria.

[Adam H. Kerman]

Anton Ertl <an...@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> wrote:
>Jon Ribbens <jon+u...@unequivocal.eu> writes:
>>On 2023-06-09, Adam H. Kerman <a...@chinet.com> wrote:

>>>Other people mentioned that banks in Europe had converted all account
>>>numbers to IBAN, the international format.

>>That doesn't sound right. I'd maybe believe that all standard accounts
>>*have* an IBAN, but you don't generally use it for anything except
>>international payments.

>For several years now, maybe a decade, the transfer forms we use in
>Austria require the IBAN of sender and recipient of the payment. The
>form also has a field for the BIC (for identifying the recipient bank,
>although AFAIK the IBAN already contains that information), but that's
>only needed for international payments. As a result, I can use the
>same form for payments within Austria and to elsewhere in the Euro
>zone.

You made me look it up. On the IBAN Web site, it appears that there is
an overall format for IBAN, but how it's formatted is unique to each
country's banking system.

Given that BIC is 8 digits with three optional digits to identify the
branch if the bank uses it, no, the BIC is not contained in the IBAN.
However, the IBAN has something within to identify the bank.

There were two Web pages explaining the IBAN structure, one for Germany
and the other for United Kingdom. Other countries didn't have more
detailed Web pages.

In Germany, pre-IBAN, banks were identified by BLZ. I think this is
comparable to a routing code on an American check. This is 8 digits,
followed by a 10 digit account number.

To create the IBAN, it appears that Germany prepended its two-letter
country code DE and the two digit modulo 97 checksum. It's wacky that
checksum digits are internal digits rather than appended at the end.

In the UK, IBAN is two-letter country code, two-digit checksum, the
first four BIC characters, six-character bank and branch code, 8
character account code.

In an earlier followup, I said IBAN was required to use SWIFT. I should
have said BIC was required to use SWIFT.

I've noticed that both the SWIFT site and IBAN site have validators, for
BIC and IBAN respectively. I think if I ever need to make an
international wire, it would behoove me to validate codes. Transactions
are reversible with invalid codes and account numbers, but there's a
second fee and a significant delay when the transaction is reversed.

The validators re-calculate checksums, don't actually check that the
account numbers are valid or belong to the person I believe it would
belong to.8 character account code.

In an earlier followup, I said IBAN was required to use SWIFT. I should
have said BIC was required to use SWIFT.

I've noticed that both the SWIFT site and IBAN site have validators, for
BIC and IBAN respectively. I think if I ever need to make an
international wire, it would behoove me to validate codes. Transactions
are reversible with invalid codes and account numbers, but there's a
second fee and a significant delay when the transaction is reversed.

The validators re-calculate checksums, don't actually check that the
account numbers are valid or belong to the person I believe it would
belong to.8 character account code.

In an earlier followup, I said IBAN was required to use SWIFT. I should
have said BIC was required to use SWIFT.

I've noticed that both the SWIFT site and IBAN site have validators, for
BIC and IBAN respectively. I think if I ever need to make an
international wire, it would behoove me to validate codes. Transactions
are reversible with invalid codes and account numbers, but there's a
second fee and a significant delay when the transaction is reversed.

The validators re-calculate checksums, don't actually check that the
account numbers are valid or belong to the person I believe it would
belong to.8 character account code.

In an earlier followup, I said IBAN was required to use SWIFT. I should
have said BIC was required to use SWIFT.

I've noticed that both the SWIFT site and IBAN site have validators, for
BIC and IBAN respectively. I think if I ever need to make an
international wire, it would behoove me to validate codes. Transactions
are reversible with invalid codes and account numbers, but there's a
second fee and a significant delay when the transaction is reversed.

The validators re-calculate checksums, don't actually check that the
account numbers are valid or belong to the person I believe it would
belong to.8 character account code.

In an earlier followup, I said IBAN was required to use SWIFT. I should
have said BIC was required to use SWIFT.

I've noticed that both the SWIFT site and IBAN site have validators, for
BIC and IBAN respectively. I think if I ever need to make an
international wire, it would behoove me to validate codes. Transactions
are reversible with invalid codes and account numbers, but there's a
second fee and a significant delay when the transaction is reversed.

The validators re-calculate checksums, don't actually check that the
account numbers are valid or belong to the person I believe it would
belong to.8 character account code.

In an earlier followup, I said IBAN was required to use SWIFT. I should
have said BIC was required to use SWIFT.

I've noticed that both the SWIFT site and IBAN site have validators, for
BIC and IBAN respectively. I think if I ever need to make an
international wire, it would behoove me to validate codes. Transactions
are reversible with invalid codes and account numbers, but there's a
second fee and a significant delay when the transaction is reversed.

The validators re-calculate checksums, don't actually check that the
account numbers are valid or belong to the person I believe it would
belong to.8 character account code.

In an earlier followup, I said IBAN was required to use SWIFT. I should
have said BIC was required to use SWIFT.

I've noticed that both the SWIFT site and IBAN site have validators, for
BIC and IBAN respectively. I think if I ever need to make an
international wire, it would behoove me to validate codes. Transactions
are reversible with invalid codes and account numbers, but there's a
second fee and a significant delay when the transaction is reversed.

The validators re-calculate checksums, don't actually check that the
account numbers are valid or belong to the person I believe it would
belong to.8 character account code.

In an earlier followup, I said IBAN was required to use SWIFT. I should
have said BIC was required to use SWIFT.

I've noticed that both the SWIFT site and IBAN site have validators, for
BIC and IBAN respectively. I think if I ever need to make an
international wire, it would behoove me to validate codes. Transactions
are reversible with invalid codes and account numbers, but there's a
second fee and a significant delay when the transaction is reversed.

The validators re-calculate checksums, don't actually check that the
account numbers are valid or belong to the person I believe it would
belong to.

[Jon Ribbens]

Help I think I'm having a stroke.

[Sn!pe]

Anton Ertl <an...@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> wrote:
[...]

> I have never seen these options. I remember that sending money abroad
> (including, e.g., the USA) through the postal system was not
> particularly expensive in the 1980s (like ATS 15 ~ USD 1.5 for sending
> to an account; I also remember ATS 35 for sending to an address), then
> we entered the EU, and "because of the EU" the same thing got
> significantly more expensive (IIRC ATS 60 for sending to an account),
> and no longer worked for sending to the USA.
>
> I then had to use my bank to send money to the USA, and the bank
> personell asked me who pays the charges on each side, and the expected
> cost was maybe ATS 400 (but you never knew beforehand if you payed the
> receiver's charges); eventuelly I learned that the best option was
> that each side pays their own charges, and then the cost was ok.
>
> But OTOH, after some years (around the time when the Euro was
> introduced) sending money within the EU became as cheap and almost as
> easy as sending money within Austria.
>
> - anton

I often send money to Australia using the Wise service; it's quick,
reliable and inexpensive. I don't know if it's available in the US.

<https://wise.com/gb/send-money/>

--
^Ï^. – Sn!pe – <https://youtu.be/_kqytf31a8E>

My pet rock Gordon just is.

[A. Dumas]

Not in my country it isn't. Card shows IBAN which contains my old number.
But I had wrongly assumed that it would be the same everywhere. The
standard is more permissive than I thought.

[Jon Ribbens]

On 2023-06-09, A Dumas <alex...@dumas.fr.invalid> wrote:
> Jon Ribbens <jon+u...@unequivocal.eu> wrote:
>> On 2023-06-09, A. Dumas <alex...@dumas.fr.invalid> wrote:
>>> It is relevant because the IBAN number is the "bank card number", it's
>>> what is printed on bank (debit) cards.
>>
>> What? No it isn't. It *can't* be, because an IBAN is an alphanumeric
>> string up to 34 characters, and a card PAN (the long number that used
>> to be embossed on the front) is all-numeric 19 digits or fewer.
>
> Not in my country it isn't. Card shows IBAN which contains my old number.

Ah, you've changed your tune now. The IBAN could contain the card PAN
as a substring, yes (although it seems a bit peculiar if it does). It
can't be identical, which is what you seemed to be claiming above. Do
you actually mean the IBAN and the card PAN have a common substring?

[vallor]

On Fri, 9 Jun 2023 21:02:25 -0000 (UTC), Jon Ribbens wrote:

> Help I think I'm having a stroke.

I know what you mean. Highly eyebrow-raising.

--
-v

[A. Dumas]

On 10-06-2023 02:12, Jon Ribbens wrote:
> On 2023-06-09, A Dumas <alex...@dumas.fr.invalid> wrote:
>> Jon Ribbens <jon+u...@unequivocal.eu> wrote:
>>> On 2023-06-09, A. Dumas <alex...@dumas.fr.invalid> wrote:
>>>> It is relevant because the IBAN number is the "bank card number", it's
>>>> what is printed on bank (debit) cards.
>>>
>>> What? No it isn't. It *can't* be, because an IBAN is an alphanumeric
>>> string up to 34 characters, and a card PAN (the long number that used
>>> to be embossed on the front) is all-numeric 19 digits or fewer.
>>
>> Not in my country it isn't. Card shows IBAN which contains my old number.
>
> Ah, you've changed your tune now. The IBAN could contain the card PAN
> as a substring, yes (although it seems a bit peculiar if it does). It
> can't be identical, which is what you seemed to be claiming above. Do
> you actually mean the IBAN and the card PAN have a common substring?

Yes. What is in the identifying part of the IBAN ("Basic Bank Account
Number" or BBAN as quoted from the Wikipedia page in another reply) is
completely left up to the national regulator. It's even optional for
IBAN to register the BBAN with SWIFT. Difference is that "under SWIFT
there is no requirement that BBANs used within a country be of a
pre-defined length". So at least *within countries* IBAN has the same
length for everyone. And apparently here in NL (which I thought would be
everywhere because why not, seems practical & convenient) the old bank
account number is simply incorporated whole in the IBAN. So yes, on my
bank (debit) card there is only the IBAN and my old number is a
substring of it.

[Jeff]

>> Hah. Don't get me started on American petrol pumps. I went to a petrol
>> station in Florida, the pump didn't work. I asked the cashier, he said
>> I had to pay first - so I said I wanted to fill up the car. He asked
>> me how much that would be... yet again, moon language. He wanted *me*
>> to guess what number *his* pump would display after filling up the
>> car. I looked around to see if someone was recording us as a prank,
>> but apparently not. I think in the end I had to settle for putting in
>> a completely random amount of petrol and not succeeding in filling up
>> the tank.
>
> Drive offs are a serious problem. It's very difficult to find a gas
> station that allows you to pay in arrears. You give them a cash deposit,
> say $75 when prices are very high and you have a large tank, which they
> hold, and then you return to the cashier to complete your transaction.

Certainly in the UK every pay at the pump station I have been to allows
you to put your card into the pump before you start filling up,it is
then authorised and given back to you, you then fill up with the
required amount of petrol and you card is then charged accordingly.

Jeff

[A. Dumas]

On 10-06-2023 10:20, Jeff wrote:
> Certainly in the UK every pay at the pump station I have been to allows
> you to put your card into the pump before you start filling up,it is
> then authorised and given back to you, you then fill up with the
> required amount of petrol and you card is then charged accordingly.

Same in NL, and this is exclusively how it works at unmanned stations of
which there are more & more. They all have the same maximum amount you
can spend in one go, used to be €100 but they upped it to €200 a few
years ago when petrol prices rose to more than €2/L.

[Andy Burns]

Jon Ribbens wrote

> We don't use cheques

Generally we don't, but we still *could*, my most recently opened bank
account still came with a chequebook, not one has been used.

[Daniel65]

Adam H. Kerman wrote on 10/6/23 1:34 am:

<Snip>

> As a taxpayer, why exactly do I want to make tax collection easier for

> the government? They will be the last place I continue to write paper

> checks to until the law is changed to refuse to accept paper checks.
> Then I'll switch to paying taxes in person, in pennies.

> As a taxpayer, YOU pay the governments/Tax Office's bills (maybe tenths
of cents per person/taxpayer), so the cheaper it is for the
governments/Tax Office, the cheaper your tax bills should be, surely!!
--
Daniel

[Fox McCloud45]

Le mer. 10872 sept. 1993 23:35:56, Jeff Layman a écrit :
> On 07/06/2023 20:13, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>> When I was a yout', I was a cashier in a department store. I remember
>> the multipart forms separated by carbon paper, and the swipe mechanical
>> device that took the impression of the embossed account number on the
>> face of the credit card. This is why credit cards are still embossed to
>> this day as these impression machines can still be used with failure of
>> communication.
>
> Not now in the UK (and probably not in the rest of Europe). My latest
> credit card, issued about 18 months ago, has no embossed numbers. The
> numbers are just printed on the back of the card. There is still a
> magnetic stripe.

It depends on the bank. Mine still issues embossed credit cards
(France).

> The only problem I have with contactless transactions is with the
> non-standard position of the NFC receiver. They can be within the LCD
> screen, above it, or even on the "top"! Why the industry can't
> standardise it in one place is beyond me.

Sometimes it's actually on the back of the device, I'm not joking.

[A. Dumas]

On 10-06-2023 12:13, Fox McCloud45 wrote:
> It depends on the bank. Mine still issues embossed credit cards
> (France).

Same here in NL from ICS/MasterCard via my bank who no longer issue
credit cards themselves despite being a quite large bank.

[Jon Ribbens]

Indeed. But if you *don't* put in a card, generally speaking the pump
will work anyway and then you go and pay afterwards.

[Adam H. Kerman]

Do you understand that Jon Ribbens was a foreigner and paying a cash
deposit?