Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #91705 > unrolled thread

Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc

Contents

  Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-09-17 23:56 -0400
    Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-18 12:07 +0200
      Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-09-18 23:57 -0400
        Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-19 21:48 +0200
          Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-20 10:46 +0100
            Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-20 13:52 +0200
              Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-09-23 21:19 +0000
                Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-24 11:57 +0200
                  Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-09-24 19:07 +0000
                    Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-09-26 03:38 -0400
                      Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-09-26 13:57 +0000
                  Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-09-26 00:32 -0400
    Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-18 12:08 +0200
      Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-09-19 00:03 -0400
        Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-19 10:12 +0100
          [OT] Cheques (was: Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES) Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-19 23:37 +0100
            Re: [OT] Cheques c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-09-20 02:08 -0400
              Re: [OT] Cheques Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-20 08:59 +0100
                Re: [OT] Cheques c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-09-20 04:43 -0400
              Re: [OT] Cheques Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-09-20 19:00 +0100
          Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-09-19 23:07 -0400
            Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-20 10:50 +0100
              Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-09-20 17:18 +0000
                Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-21 13:06 +0100
                  Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES Chris Abraham <chris@gerriscorp.com> - 2026-09-21 13:15 -0400
                  Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-09-21 19:00 +0000
                    Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-21 23:38 +0100
                      Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-09-22 01:59 +0000
                  Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-22 00:58 +0100
                    Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-09-22 02:10 +0000
                    Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-22 07:04 +0100
                      Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-09-22 07:23 +0000
                        Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-22 10:26 +0100
                        Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2026-09-22 10:42 +0100
                      Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-22 10:22 +0100
            Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-09-23 21:29 +0000
              Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-09-23 23:17 -0400
        Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-19 21:50 +0200
          Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-09-19 23:26 -0400
            Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-09-20 13:58 +0200
          Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-20 10:48 +0100
            Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-09-20 17:14 +0000
              Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-09-20 23:54 -0400
                Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-21 12:56 +0100
            Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-09-20 19:56 +0100
              Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-09-21 13:07 +0100

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

#91705 — Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES

https://techxplore.com/news/2026-09-robotic-vacuum-witness-home-robots.html

Your robotic vacuum is a witness: What home robots mean for
evidence, privacy and the law

A husband in Taiwan suspected his wife of having an affair.
In September 2023, he found a used toothbrush at their
vacation home, and garage video showed an unfamiliar man
driving his wife there. Three months later, he opened their
robot vacuum's app to speak with her and saw an intimate
encounter through its live camera.

He recorded the feed and used it to win about US$16,000
from his wife and her lover for infringing on his marital
rights. Then the Taoyuan District Court sentenced him to
five months in jail and fined him roughly $4,700 for
recording private activity without consent.

Both rulings are defensible. Together, they expose a
troubling gap: Devices in homes now generate evidence
continuously and often invisibly, while the governing
law remains a patchwork. As faculty members in a school
of interdisciplinary forensics, we see such cases where
forensic practice meets law that has not kept pace.

. . .

   Just one lesson.

   MANY tech items can/will SPY on you, then the info
   can be used AGAINST you.

   A few years back I did consider buying a 'RoomBa'
   because I hate doing all the floors. But NOW,
   HELL NO ! NO fuckin' cams inside my house EVER.
   Somebody somewhere for some reason WILL find a
   way to use it against me somehow. I lead a very
   boring life, but STILL ........

   Total access = total vulnerability.

   And NEVER believe any "privacy" claims from
   manufacturers.

   Keep a bit of PostIt over all my lap cams so
   nobody can steal my face.

   This all is getting VERY bad. Our 'convenience'
   culture is now stabbing us in the back.

   Hell, STILL show up at my bank to do biz in
   person several times a year even when I don't
   really HAVE to ... WANT them to SEE me, know
   who I am. My "look" and manner is a bit
   distinctive, they won't forget.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#91726

On 2026-09-18 05:56, c186282 wrote:
> 
>    Keep a bit of PostIt over all my lap cams so
>    nobody can steal my face.

I just tried face recognition in a new laptop with Windows 11. It is 
handy :-)

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#91765

On 9/18/26 06:07, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2026-09-18 05:56, c186282 wrote:
>>
>>    Keep a bit of PostIt over all my lap cams so
>>    nobody can steal my face.
> 
> I just tried face recognition in a new laptop with Windows 11. It is 
> handy :-)

   But for WHOM ???  :-)

   Let 'Them' snatch your biometrics and
   then you're in big trouble.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#91794

On 2026-09-19 05:57, c186282 wrote:
> On 9/18/26 06:07, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>> On 2026-09-18 05:56, c186282 wrote:
>>>
>>>    Keep a bit of PostIt over all my lap cams so
>>>    nobody can steal my face.
>>
>> I just tried face recognition in a new laptop with Windows 11. It is 
>> handy :-)
> 
>    But for WHOM ???  :-)
> 
>    Let 'Them' snatch your biometrics and
>    then you're in big trouble.
> 

There was a tick to harden face recognition. I used it. The thing 
rebooted. You always reboot in Windoze.

Face recognition uses infrared camera, I don't know why.

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#91830

On 19/09/2026 20:48, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> Face recognition uses infrared camera, I don't know why.

So a photograph of your face won't work?

-- 
“Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, 
diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.”
― Groucho Marx

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#91838

On 2026-09-20 11:46, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 19/09/2026 20:48, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>> Face recognition uses infrared camera, I don't know why.
> 
> So a photograph of your face won't work?
> 

I haven't tried :-D

Maybe.

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#92046

Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
> On 2026-09-20 11:46, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 19/09/2026 20:48, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>> Face recognition uses infrared camera, I don't know why.
>> 
>> So a photograph of your face won't work?
>> 
> 
> I haven't tried :-D
> 
> Maybe.

I think TNP meant "so that someone can't use a photo of your face to 
log in".  No IR signature, not a "living person", so no unlock.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#92064

On 2026-09-23 23:19, Rich wrote:
> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2026-09-20 11:46, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 19/09/2026 20:48, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>>> Face recognition uses infrared camera, I don't know why.
>>>
>>> So a photograph of your face won't work?
>>>
>>
>> I haven't tried :-D
>>
>> Maybe.
> 
> I think TNP meant "so that someone can't use a photo of your face to
> log in".  No IR signature, not a "living person", so no unlock.

There is a click on the configuration of face recognition in W11, where 
it says "make face recognition more secure; needs reboot". I clicked. 
Maybe that was the activation of the IR camera.

When I bought the laptop at Lenovo, there was a choice of 16" WUXGA 
(1920x1200) and another one with more resolution. A note said that the 
infrared camera was added. And somewhere else it said it was used for 
face recognition.

When I am logged out, see the camera led blinking, I approach the camera 
a lot, the machine recognizes me and automatically does both login and 
pass equivalent and I'm inside. I mean, it would work (not tried) with 
several people login the one that is there.

I like the feature. I would like this added to Linux "easily". And 
finger print sensor. We are late.

(yes, I was told that fingerprinting is possible, but not easy to configure)

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#92098

On Thu, 24 Sep 2026 11:57:43 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote:

> (yes, I was told that fingerprinting is possible, but not easy to
> configure)

I had the reader working on the Lenovo T480 when I was running EndeavourOS 
(Arch). It didn't last long since it also required a fingerprint for sudo. 
I suppose there is some PAM configuration that would separate it out but I 
didn't pursue it. The laptop is on a shelf behind me and connected to an 
external monitor/keyboard so it was inconvenient 95% of the time when I'm 
not using it as a laptop.

It did take some fiddling but that may have been Arch. I have Tumbleweed 
on it now and haven't tried to set it up.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#92189

On 9/24/26 15:07, rbowman wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Sep 2026 11:57:43 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> 
>> (yes, I was told that fingerprinting is possible, but not easy to
>> configure)
> 
> I had the reader working on the Lenovo T480 when I was running EndeavourOS
> (Arch). It didn't last long since it also required a fingerprint for sudo.
> I suppose there is some PAM configuration that would separate it out but I
> didn't pursue it. The laptop is on a shelf behind me and connected to an
> external monitor/keyboard so it was inconvenient 95% of the time when I'm
> not using it as a laptop.
> 
> It did take some fiddling but that may have been Arch. I have Tumbleweed
> on it now and haven't tried to set it up.

   Fingerprint units, USB, have been
   available for a LONG LONG time.

   Alas, IF you put that biometric "out
   there" NOW ... it'll be stolen and used
   against you.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#92215

On Sat, 26 Sep 2026 03:38:58 -0400, c186282 wrote:

>    Fingerprint units, USB, have been available for a LONG LONG time.


Lenovo uses a Synaptics Metallica reader that isn't recognized by fprintd. 
You need to use open-fprintd and a Python shim. It's controversial since 
the library contains a binary block.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#92178

On 9/24/26 05:57, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2026-09-23 23:19, Rich wrote:
>> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 2026-09-20 11:46, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>> On 19/09/2026 20:48, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>>>> Face recognition uses infrared camera, I don't know why.
>>>>
>>>> So a photograph of your face won't work?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I haven't tried :-D
>>>
>>> Maybe.
>>
>> I think TNP meant "so that someone can't use a photo of your face to
>> log in".  No IR signature, not a "living person", so no unlock.
> 
> There is a click on the configuration of face recognition in W11, where 
> it says "make face recognition more secure; needs reboot". I clicked. 
> Maybe that was the activation of the IR camera.
> 
> When I bought the laptop at Lenovo, there was a choice of 16" WUXGA 
> (1920x1200) and another one with more resolution. A note said that the 
> infrared camera was added. And somewhere else it said it was used for 
> face recognition.
> 
> When I am logged out, see the camera led blinking, I approach the camera 
> a lot, the machine recognizes me and automatically does both login and 
> pass equivalent and I'm inside. I mean, it would work (not tried) with 
> several people login the one that is there.
> 
> I like the feature. I would like this added to Linux "easily". And 
> finger print sensor. We are late.
> 
> (yes, I was told that fingerprinting is possible, but not easy to 
> configure)

   First off, note "infrared" means BARELY infrared ...
   880/920nm. Almost all modern chips are sensitive
   to that - have several, and IR floodlights, for
   security purposes.

   HARD to find lenses on Amazon that DON'T have the
   damned IR filters. Some SENSORS have one glued on.
   Think makers wanna charge you double for IR. Note
   a little pick, like the smallest 'precision'
   screwdriver, can, with care, break or pop off
   lens filters safely. Just had to do that with
   an 'ArduCam' package deal.

   Common dyes that might be used to make a 'face
   picture' likely will NOT look the same in that
   IR band. Common "black" looks WHITE or RED.
   Black isn't black - it's three color dyes mixed
   together.

   However, 'professional' frauds ... I can envision
   an 'inflatable/configurable face' that IS painted
   so even IR looks right. If you're planning to steal
   tens of millions - a trivial investment.

   Sorry ... really NO more 'security' these days.
   It's all a farce, still promoted by vested
   commercial interests. Very soon, "in person"
   will become THE test just like in the Old Days.
   No e-methods will suffice. They'll have even
   stolen yer biometrics ... fake thumb-prints.

   BIG impact for the over-50 crowd who might
   have great difficulty appearing In Person.
   That's a large, and growing, segment of the
   western population.

   IF you can think of a hack-proof fix - you
   can make yer fortune ... BIG fortune.

   Alas, as implied, pix of faces ... the
   biometric data will be stored SOMEWHERE,
   probably insecure. Once "They" GET it ...

   Welcome to the modern world.

   AI is making all this MUCH worse - quick.

   Back to the Sears Catalog - mail ...
   written form and paper money-order ....
   1925 redux.

   Hey, WE did it ! BELIEVED in e-security.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#91727

On 2026-09-18 05:56, c186282 wrote:
>    Hell, STILL show up at my bank to do biz in
>    person several times a year even when I don't
>    really HAVE to ... WANT them to SEE me, know
>    who I am. My "look" and manner is a bit
>    distinctive, they won't forget.

We can't do that anymore without an appointment.

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#91766

On 9/18/26 06:08, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2026-09-18 05:56, c186282 wrote:
>>    Hell, STILL show up at my bank to do biz in
>>    person several times a year even when I don't
>>    really HAVE to ... WANT them to SEE me, know
>>    who I am. My "look" and manner is a bit
>>    distinctive, they won't forget.
> 
> We can't do that anymore without an appointment.

   Yer kidding ???!!!

   Can't even deposit a check ... or maybe you
   are talking about a longer more-detailed
   discussion with a banker ?

   My banks DO like 'appointments', but sometimes
   ask the teller and they can get you right in.
   Had to do that twice over the past month at
   two different banks. Pick a "boring", mid-week,
   mid-afternoon, time to come in.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#91774

c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> writes:
> On 9/18/26 06:08, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>> On 2026-09-18 05:56, c186282 wrote:
>>>    Hell, STILL show up at my bank to do biz in
>>>    person several times a year even when I don't
>>>    really HAVE to ... WANT them to SEE me, know
>>>    who I am. My "look" and manner is a bit
>>>    distinctive, they won't forget.
>> We can't do that anymore without an appointment.
>
>   Yer kidding ???!!!
>
>   Can't even deposit a check ... or maybe you
>   are talking about a longer more-detailed
>   discussion with a banker ?

I don’t know about Spain but in Portugal my partner was able to go to a
branch and talk with someone, no appointment needed but a bit of a wait
for someone to be available.

Here cheques are rather rare these days, electronic transfers are
quicker and easier. Even when they they do turn up you can deposit them
by scanning them with your phone.

-- 
https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#91800 — [OT] Cheques (was: Re: Note : Robo-Vacs now Legal WITNESSES)

On 2026-09-19, Richard Kettlewell wrote:

> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> writes:
>> On 9/18/26 06:08, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>> On 2026-09-18 05:56, c186282 wrote:
>>>>    Hell, STILL show up at my bank to do biz in
>>>>    person several times a year even when I don't
>>>>    really HAVE to ... WANT them to SEE me, know
>>>>    who I am. My "look" and manner is a bit
>>>>    distinctive, they won't forget.
>>> We can't do that anymore without an appointment.
>>
>>   Yer kidding ???!!!
>>
>>   Can't even deposit a check ... or maybe you
>>   are talking about a longer more-detailed
>>   discussion with a banker ?
>
> I don’t know about Spain but in Portugal my partner was able to go to a
> branch and talk with someone, no appointment needed but a bit of a wait
> for someone to be available.

It also used to take some time for funds to become available. I have no
idea if that's still the case with .pt banks. Besides bank-specific
ATMs, some interbank ATMs may also allow deposit of cheques, but that's
likely limited to users of cards from SIBS' own card network.

> Here cheques are rather rare these days, electronic transfers are
> quicker and easier. Even when they they do turn up you can deposit them
> by scanning them with your phone.

.pt banks did get quicker transfers, some banks used to take several
banking days. Maybe this was EU imposition? But, probably because bank
account transfers aren't used that much compared to other countries, I
think some banks still charge for these, possibly after a small number
of free transfers. For .pt bank users, I think payment of e.g. bills is
usually done using SIBS' payment system with "entity" and "reference"
numbers.

-- 
Nuno Silva

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#91813 — Re: [OT] Cheques

On 9/19/26 18:37, Nuno Silva wrote:
> On 2026-09-19, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
> 
>> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> writes:
>>> On 9/18/26 06:08, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>>> On 2026-09-18 05:56, c186282 wrote:
>>>>>     Hell, STILL show up at my bank to do biz in
>>>>>     person several times a year even when I don't
>>>>>     really HAVE to ... WANT them to SEE me, know
>>>>>     who I am. My "look" and manner is a bit
>>>>>     distinctive, they won't forget.
>>>> We can't do that anymore without an appointment.
>>>
>>>    Yer kidding ???!!!
>>>
>>>    Can't even deposit a check ... or maybe you
>>>    are talking about a longer more-detailed
>>>    discussion with a banker ?
>>
>> I don’t know about Spain but in Portugal my partner was able to go to a
>> branch and talk with someone, no appointment needed but a bit of a wait
>> for someone to be available.
> 
> It also used to take some time for funds to become available. I have no
> idea if that's still the case with .pt banks. Besides bank-specific
> ATMs, some interbank ATMs may also allow deposit of cheques, but that's
> likely limited to users of cards from SIBS' own card network.

   BEWARE of 'ATM deposited' cheques !!!

   MIGHT go to the wrong acct, MIGHT not
   be properly read. IF you use an ATM
   yer bank will say "Well, you should
   have used one of our tellers ...".
   This is a COMMON story.


>> Here cheques are rather rare these days, electronic transfers are
>> quicker and easier. Even when they they do turn up you can deposit them
>> by scanning them with your phone.
> 
> .pt banks did get quicker transfers, some banks used to take several
> banking days. Maybe this was EU imposition? But, probably because bank
> account transfers aren't used that much compared to other countries, I
> think some banks still charge for these, possibly after a small number
> of free transfers. For .pt bank users, I think payment of e.g. bills is
> usually done using SIBS' payment system with "entity" and "reference"
> numbers.

   "Electronic" is MOSTLY OK ... but CAN go
   wrong, and will leave you with minimal or
   no hard documentation.

   For larger transactions, really REALLY like
   PAPER transactions. Then you have a physical
   bit of paper to wave in their faces ... to
   present to yer lawyers if necessary.

   No wonder they hate 'paper'/'in person'  :-)

   The paradigm these days seems to be "Who Gives
   A Shit ?". Banks and such DON'T CARE if you
   are totally ripped-off - "cost of doing
   business with the unwashed proletariat".

   So, LAWYERS and TV News exposure. Gotta
   make them REGRET that approach. If they
   rip you off for $10,000 or $100,000 ...
   YOU gouge them for TEN TIMES that much -
   and make it PUBLIC. Kind of a 'war' now.
   What a sorry state of things !!!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#91814 — Re: [OT] Cheques

On 2026-09-20, c186282 wrote:

> On 9/19/26 18:37, Nuno Silva wrote:
>> On 2026-09-19, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
>>
>>> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> writes:
>>>> On 9/18/26 06:08, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>>>> On 2026-09-18 05:56, c186282 wrote:
>>>>>>     Hell, STILL show up at my bank to do biz in
>>>>>>     person several times a year even when I don't
>>>>>>     really HAVE to ... WANT them to SEE me, know
>>>>>>     who I am. My "look" and manner is a bit
>>>>>>     distinctive, they won't forget.
>>>>> We can't do that anymore without an appointment.
>>>>
>>>>    Yer kidding ???!!!
>>>>
>>>>    Can't even deposit a check ... or maybe you
>>>>    are talking about a longer more-detailed
>>>>    discussion with a banker ?
>>>
>>> I don’t know about Spain but in Portugal my partner was able to go to a
>>> branch and talk with someone, no appointment needed but a bit of a wait
>>> for someone to be available.
>>
>> It also used to take some time for funds to become available. I have no
>> idea if that's still the case with .pt banks. Besides bank-specific
>> ATMs, some interbank ATMs may also allow deposit of cheques, but that's
>> likely limited to users of cards from SIBS' own card network.
>
>   BEWARE of 'ATM deposited' cheques !!!
>
>   MIGHT go to the wrong acct, MIGHT not
>   be properly read. IF you use an ATM
>   yer bank will say "Well, you should
>   have used one of our tellers ...".
>   This is a COMMON story.

You're identifying with your card, if you choose to deposit to the
associated account, well, that'll be a bit harder to fuck up.

From what I've seen, ATMs often (if not always?) ask you to enter the
amount by hand, so if there's a mismatch, I expect there'll be some
attempt to contact the customer, or at least there'll be a trail of some
sort.

>>> Here cheques are rather rare these days, electronic transfers are
>>> quicker and easier. Even when they they do turn up you can deposit them
>>> by scanning them with your phone.
>>
>> .pt banks did get quicker transfers, some banks used to take several
>> banking days. Maybe this was EU imposition? But, probably because bank
>> account transfers aren't used that much compared to other countries, I
>> think some banks still charge for these, possibly after a small number
>> of free transfers. For .pt bank users, I think payment of e.g. bills is
>> usually done using SIBS' payment system with "entity" and "reference"
>> numbers.
>
>   "Electronic" is MOSTLY OK ... but CAN go
>   wrong, and will leave you with minimal or
>   no hard documentation.

Electronic wire transfers, or that SIBS payment system, is harder to
mangle, although in engineering one knows never say never unless there's
a sufficiently absolute guarantee. Still, these tend to happen in more
controlled environments, at least when done on ATMs.

In my experience, it's CNP transactions over external bank networks
(MasterCard, Visa) that can be more problematic in that regard, in the
sense that these can fail without you immediately getting feedback or a
document of some sort.

>   For larger transactions, really REALLY like
>   PAPER transactions. Then you have a physical
>   bit of paper to wave in their faces ... to
>   present to yer lawyers if necessary.
>
>   No wonder they hate 'paper'/'in person'  :-)
>
>   The paradigm these days seems to be "Who Gives
>   A Shit ?". Banks and such DON'T CARE if you
>   are totally ripped-off - "cost of doing
>   business with the unwashed proletariat".
>
>   So, LAWYERS and TV News exposure. Gotta
>   make them REGRET that approach. If they
>   rip you off for $10,000 or $100,000 ...
>   YOU gouge them for TEN TIMES that much -
>   and make it PUBLIC. Kind of a 'war' now.
>   What a sorry state of things !!!
>

-- 
Nuno Silva

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#91820 — Re: [OT] Cheques

On 9/20/26 03:59, Nuno Silva wrote:
> On 2026-09-20, c186282 wrote:
> 
>> On 9/19/26 18:37, Nuno Silva wrote:
>>> On 2026-09-19, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
>>>
>>>> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> writes:
>>>>> On 9/18/26 06:08, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>>>>> On 2026-09-18 05:56, c186282 wrote:
>>>>>>>      Hell, STILL show up at my bank to do biz in
>>>>>>>      person several times a year even when I don't
>>>>>>>      really HAVE to ... WANT them to SEE me, know
>>>>>>>      who I am. My "look" and manner is a bit
>>>>>>>      distinctive, they won't forget.
>>>>>> We can't do that anymore without an appointment.
>>>>>
>>>>>     Yer kidding ???!!!
>>>>>
>>>>>     Can't even deposit a check ... or maybe you
>>>>>     are talking about a longer more-detailed
>>>>>     discussion with a banker ?
>>>>
>>>> I don’t know about Spain but in Portugal my partner was able to go to a
>>>> branch and talk with someone, no appointment needed but a bit of a wait
>>>> for someone to be available.
>>>
>>> It also used to take some time for funds to become available. I have no
>>> idea if that's still the case with .pt banks. Besides bank-specific
>>> ATMs, some interbank ATMs may also allow deposit of cheques, but that's
>>> likely limited to users of cards from SIBS' own card network.
>>
>>    BEWARE of 'ATM deposited' cheques !!!
>>
>>    MIGHT go to the wrong acct, MIGHT not
>>    be properly read. IF you use an ATM
>>    yer bank will say "Well, you should
>>    have used one of our tellers ...".
>>    This is a COMMON story.
> 
> You're identifying with your card, if you choose to deposit to the
> associated account, well, that'll be a bit harder to fuck up.
> 
>  From what I've seen, ATMs often (if not always?) ask you to enter the
> amount by hand, so if there's a mismatch, I expect there'll be some
> attempt to contact the customer, or at least there'll be a trail of some
> sort.

   Sorry, but BAD stories abound.

   The banks will NOT help you, not worth
   their time. They COUNT on you not having
   enough Lawyer Power to DO anything about it.

   NEVER, EVER, deposit via ATM.

   Telling you True.

   Gonna deposit to an acct in the next week
   or two ... a couple of cheques. WILL do
   it with a teller, NOT via ATM. WILL get
   a stamped bit of paper they CAN'T deny,
   can wave it in their faces.

   They HATE that .......

   Oh, USA, "checks" .........

   Banks are now, well, NOT yer advocates.
   It's MASS biz ... and they are willing
   to accept X-number of FUCK UPS - at YOUR
   expense of course.

   LAWYERS, MSM ... your best FRIENDS here,
   but not very prompt.

   But DO get that stamped bit of paper !!!
   "Hard Proof".

   Just sayin'.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#91855 — Re: [OT] Cheques

c186282 wrote:

>    BEWARE of 'ATM deposited' cheques !!!

I avoid those now, too many OCR failures ...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc

csiph-web