From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

This is about Google search more than about Firefox, but I don't know
what other active ng would be more appropriate than this one, And I
would think you are all interested, even concerned about stuff like
this.

Someone on Nextdoor got a text supposedly from the local gas and
electric company, BGE, wanting to do maintenance inside her house. The
number to call was 855-470-8800. I googled that number and the first
hit I got was https://foxbaltimore.com/news/local/bge-reminds-customers-to-stay-vigilant-avoid-energy-related-scams
Yet that number does not appear in the article. Why was it listed in
the search results?

Does google also search the HTML source code in deciding what meets the
search criteria????

At any rate, it's not in the source code either.

This is not the first time I've gotten a hit that does not seem to be a
hit. Can someone shed light on how this happens?

BTW, it is a legitimate phone number for them. Other posters confirmed
it and other hits from the same search, including WBAL, do include the
phone number. Did google look at the valid hits and then just include
this one because it was also from BGE? If so whey didn't it include all
of the 1000's of articles that must mention BGE.
It does have a hit on https://www.bge.com/my-account/customer-support/contact-us/contact-information which also doesn't include the search phone number, but gives other
numbers. Someone posted here once that Google search was not
sophisticated, but it seems to have figured out that the number was a
BGE number and people were afraid it was involved in scams so it should
return an article with alternate/better phone numbers and an article on
scams. Is that what has happened?
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

On 26.07.2025 20:21, micky wrote:

This is about Google search more than about Firefox, but I don't know
what other active ng would be more appropriate than this one, And I
would think you are all interested, even concerned about stuff like
this.

Someone on Nextdoor got a text supposedly from the local gas and
electric company, BGE, wanting to do maintenance inside her house. The number to call was 855-470-8800. I googled that number and the first
hit I got was https://foxbaltimore.com/news/local/bge-reminds-customers-to-stay-vigilant-avoid-energy-related-scams
Yet that number does not appear in the article. Why was it listed in
the search results?

Google is now in 2025 a piece of shit.
It's 100% serving their advertisers pages.
Plus shitty AI summaries optimized for advertisers.
Except the search is something very special programming
related.
I searched "Waesserhaegl" a 90s metal band and the first
3 pages showed me "Wasserhahn" (Water tap) compainies that
sell "Wasserhans"...

it's a complete fuckup, nothing like 20-25 years ago.

ciao

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

micky wrote:

The number to call was 855-470-8800.> I googled that number and the first hit I got was
<https://foxbaltimore.com/news/local/bge-reminds-customers-to-stay-vigilant-avoid-energy-related-scams>
Yet that number does not appear in the article. > Why was it listed in the search results?

The three individual numbers 855, 470 and 8800 *do* appear in the page,
so I suppose google treats the hyphen as a delimiter.

If you do a "verbatim" search under the "tools" option it no longer
includes the reddit page in the results.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

In alt.comp.software.firefox, on Sat, 26 Jul 2025 20:28:08 +0200, Schugo <schugo@schugo.de> wrote:

On 26.07.2025 20:21, micky wrote:

This is about Google search more than about Firefox, but I don't know
what other active ng would be more appropriate than this one, And I
would think you are all interested, even concerned about stuff like
this.

Someone on Nextdoor got a text supposedly from the local gas and
electric company, BGE, wanting to do maintenance inside her house. The
number to call was 855-470-8800. I googled that number and the first
hit I got was
https://foxbaltimore.com/news/local/bge-reminds-customers-to-stay-vigilant-avoid-energy-related-scams
Yet that number does not appear in the article. Why was it listed in
the search results?

Google is now in 2025 a piece of shit.
It's 100% serving their advertisers pages.
Plus shitty AI summaries optimized for advertisers.
Except the search is something very special programming
related.
I searched "Waesserhaegl" a 90s metal band and the first
3 pages showed me "Wasserhahn" (Water tap) compainies that
sell "Wasserhans"...

You know there is an easy remedy for that. Include -watertap in your
search terms, or maybe -water . Or add band . Or metal band .

In other circumstances, people would like it that they don't have to
spell words exactly right.

I too dislike the so-called AI, which takes up space so that I have to
scroll down to get to what I want to see. Although google AI uses an #
sign to point to the actual webpage from where they reached their "concludsions". Chat GPT doesn't do that. (I only checked twice out of curiosity. I don't use it.)

And I believe the individual page summearies wwhich I've used from the beginning use a rudmentary AI.

And in the thread I just started at 2PM ET today, it looks like they've
used some sort of AI to include an article about scams that doesn't even include my only search term, a phone number.

it's a complete fuckup, nothing like 20-25 years ago.

ciao

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

micky wrote:

This is about Google search more than about Firefox, but I don't know
what other active ng would be more appropriate than this one, And I
would think you are all interested, even concerned about stuff like
this.

Nope, wrong.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

micky wrote:

I too dislike the so-called AI, which takes up space so that I have to
scroll down to get to what I want to see.

append the following to your search URL
&udm=14

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

In alt.comp.software.firefox, on Sat, 26 Jul 2025 19:42:20 +0100, Andy
Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:

micky wrote:

The number to call was 855-470-8800.> I googled that number and the first hit I got was
<https://foxbaltimore.com/news/local/bge-reminds-customers-to-stay-vigilant-avoid-energy-related-scams>
Yet that number does not appear in the article. > Why was it listed in the search results?

The three individual numbers 855, 470 and 8800 *do* appear in the page,

Huh? I don't find any of those 3. Can you quote whole sentences?

so I suppose google treats the hyphen as a delimiter.

If you do a "verbatim" search under the "tools" option it no longer
includes the reddit page in the results.

And I don't find Verbatim under tools either. I find Advanced but
don't find "verbatim" there either, only a suggestion to use quotes. Are
we in the same world?

I know about double quotes, and when I use them, it no longer includes
the FoxBaltimore page, or the reddit page that I had not looked at
before

.... this is interesting: Because I copied a little too much in the
first place, I pasted 855-470-8800 . with an extra period. When I
omitted the period, I got 2 more hits**, 342 instead of 340, but also a
big clue to to how Google "thinks". The so-called AI says
The phone number 855-470-8800 is associated with Baltimore Gas and
Electric (BGE)

Specifically, this number was used by BGE for customers who wanted
to learn more about or schedule appointments for the installation of
smart meters. BGE implemented a program to upgrade from analog
meters to smart meters, which transmit data wirelessly.

Potential for scams
While the number is legitimate, BGE has warned customers about u
utility impostor scams, where scammers use phone number spoofing to
make it appear they are calling from BGE or Exelon numbers.

So it did search on the number, find that it was BGE, and include BGE
hits that provide altenate numbers. I have to admit, that sound like
actual artifical intelligence to me.

And then it starts in about scams, even though it's not a scam number,
it's a valid BGE number. It must have found other urls where people
thought it might be a scam, like the original poster in NextDoor did
(and some repliers thought for sure it was.) That must be why it gave
the fox post about scams, and that too seems a lot like intelligence to
me.

All this complicated checking seems loaded with potential for error.

The biggest proglem with so-called AI is that I'm not even carefully
checking and I find mistakes. I would much rather read the articles
they are going by, which at least google so-called AI points to but
chatGPT does not . There are mistakes in original articles too (which so-called AI will repeat) but only becaise of the human condition, not
because a computer program was inadequate.


BTW, I see they've moved the hit count to the tools dropdown. Don't know
why.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

In alt.comp.software.firefox, on Sat, 26 Jul 2025 19:52:18 +0100, Andy
Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:

micky wrote:

I too dislike the so-called AI, which takes up space so that I have to
scroll down to get to what I want to see.

append the following to your search URL
&udm=14

Thanks. I hope someone will write an add-on to automate this. I
woudln't know where to start.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

micky wrote:

The three individual numbers 855, 470 and 8800do appear in the page,

Huh? I don't find any of those 3. Can you quote whole sentences?

view source, select and copy every thing,paste it into notepad, then
search for them ...

And I don't find Verbatim under tools either.

Tools / AllResults / Verbatim

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

On 26/07/2025 19:28, Schugo wrote:

Google is now in 2025 a piece of shit.

Google is now in 2025 running a profitable business. If you don't like
people running a business in their own ways then you are free not to go
there. There are other alternatives you can try or find suitable
substitutes.

Good luck and happy computing.



--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

On 2025-07-26 21:18, micky wrote:

In alt.comp.software.firefox, on Sat, 26 Jul 2025 19:42:20 +0100, Andy
Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:

micky wrote:

The number to call was 855-470-8800.> I googled that number and the first hit I got was
<https://foxbaltimore.com/news/local/bge-reminds-customers-to-stay-vigilant-avoid-energy-related-scams>
Yet that number does not appear in the article. > Why was it listed in the search results?

The three individual numbers 855, 470 and 8800 *do* appear in the page,

Huh? I don't find any of those 3. Can you quote whole sentences?

Why don't you google directly for "8554708800" without quotes? Or even "+18554708800". The third hit is BGE:

<https://www.bge.com/smart-energy/smart-grid-smart-meter/smart-meters>

+++-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Please note: BGE is upgrading both electric and gas meters. If one of
your meters is outdoors and the other meter is indoors or otherwise inaccessible, such as behind a gate, we may have upgraded your outdoor
meter, but we still need access to your additional meter. You will be considered as opting out, and assessed the opt-out fees, unless we are
able to upgrade both meters. If one of your meters still needs to be
upgraded, please call BGE at 1-855-470-8800 to schedule an appointment. -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+++-

The number is legit.
--
Cheers, Carlos.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

On 26.07.2025 22:14, Sam Pichai wrote:

On 26/07/2025 19:28, Schugo wrote:

Google is now in 2025 a piece of shit.

Google is now in 2025 running a profitable business. If you don't like people running a business in their own ways then you are free not to go there. There are other alternatives you can try or find suitable substitutes.

Good luck and happy computing.

What a fucking loser attitude!

caio..
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

Why don't you google directly for "8554708800" without quotes? Or even >"+18554708800". The third hit is BGE:

Toll-free numbers aren't dialable from outside United States and Canada
so they wouldn't be written in international format. Also, never search
with the trunk code "1" which is coincidentally the same as the country
code.

Either search as a 10-digit string 8554708800 or as a phrase of three
words "855 470 8800". The second will take care of the variety of ways
such numbers are written with and without hyphens or with and without
spaces. Some people annoyingly use periods. The punctuation is ignored
but the spaces are used as word separators.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

Schugo <schugo@schugo.de> wrote:

26.07.2025 22:14, Sam Pichai wrote:

26/07/2025 19:28, Schugo wrote:

Google is now in 2025 a piece of shit.

Google is now in 2025 running a profitable business. If you don't like >>people running a business in their own ways then you are free not to go >>there. There are other alternatives you can try or find suitable >>substitutes.

Good luck and happy computing.

What a fucking loser attitude!

caio..

Not going along with your nonstop impotent bitching and moaning does not
make him a loser but an adult. Try it some time, seamus. I'm calling for immediate retirement of this sockpuppet.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

On 26.07.2025 22:47, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

Schugo <schugo@schugo.de> wrote:

26.07.2025 22:14, Sam Pichai wrote:

26/07/2025 19:28, Schugo wrote:

Google is now in 2025 a piece of shit.

Google is now in 2025 running a profitable business. If you don't like >>>people running a business in their own ways then you are free not to go >>>there. There are other alternatives you can try or find suitable >>>substitutes.

Good luck and happy computing.

What a fucking loser attitude!

caio..

Not going along with your nonstop impotent bitching and moaning does not
make him a loser but an adult. Try it some time, seamus. I'm calling for immediate retirement of this sockpuppet.

fuck off, you ppl probably voted for Trump too, didn't u?

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

On 7/26/2025 3:55 PM, Schugo wrote:

On 26.07.2025 22:47, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

Schugo <schugo@schugo.de> wrote:

26.07.2025 22:14, Sam Pichai wrote:

26/07/2025 19:28, Schugo wrote:

Google is now in 2025 a piece of shit.

Google is now in 2025 running a profitable business. If you don't like >>>> people running a business in their own ways then you are free not to go >>>> there. There are other alternatives you can try or find suitable
substitutes.

Good luck and happy computing.

What a fucking loser attitude!

caio..

Not going along with your nonstop impotent bitching and moaning does not
make him a loser but an adult. Try it some time, seamus. I'm calling for
immediate retirement of this sockpuppet.

fuck off, you ppl probably voted for Trump too, didn't u?

https://i.postimg.cc/qByNrvsV/Fuk-Trump.jpg
--
Science doesn't support Darwin. Scientists do.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

On 7/26/25 3:19 PM, micky wrote:

In alt.comp.software.firefox, on Sat, 26 Jul 2025 19:52:18 +0100, Andy
Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:

micky wrote:

I too dislike the so-called AI, which takes up space so that I have to
scroll down to get to what I want to see.

append the following to your search URL
&udm=14

Thanks. I hope someone will write an add-on to automate this. I
woudln't know where to start.

And what does udm do?
--
Linux Mint 22.1, Thunderbird 128.13.0esr, Mozilla Firefox 141.0
Alan K.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

micky wrote:

In alt.comp.software.firefox, on Sat, 26 Jul 2025 19:52:18 +0100, Andy
Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:

micky wrote:

I too dislike the so-called AI, which takes up space so that I have to
scroll down to get to what I want to see.

append the following to your search URL
&udm=14

Thanks. I hope someone will write an add-on to automate this. I
woudln't know where to start.

Here you are, dumbfuck:
https://addons.mozilla.org/de/firefox/addon/udm-14/ https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/udm14/ffcpcoipaaccggomdlgaophbocccfapl --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

Alan K. wrote:

On 7/26/25 3:19 PM, micky wrote:

In alt.comp.software.firefox, on Sat, 26 Jul 2025 19:52:18 +0100, Andy
Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:

micky wrote:

I too dislike the so-called AI, which takes up space so that I have to >>>> scroll down to get to what I want to see.

append the following to your search URL
&udm=14

Thanks. I hope someone will write an add-on to automate this. I
woudln't know where to start.

And what does udm do?

https://tedium.co/2024/05/17/google-web-search-make-default/
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

On 2025-07-26 22:45, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

Why don't you google directly for "8554708800" without quotes? Or even
"+18554708800". The third hit is BGE:

Toll-free numbers aren't dialable from outside United States and Canada
so they wouldn't be written in international format. Also, never search
with the trunk code "1" which is coincidentally the same as the country
code.

Either search as a 10-digit string 8554708800 or as a phrase of three
words "855 470 8800". The second will take care of the variety of ways
such numbers are written with and without hyphens or with and without
spaces. Some people annoyingly use periods. The punctuation is ignored
but the spaces are used as word separators.

"+18554708800" gets a hit on the Truecaller site.
--
Cheers, Carlos.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

On 2025-07-26 22:45, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

Why don't you google directly for "8554708800" without quotes? Or even
"+18554708800". The third hit is BGE:

Toll-free numbers aren't dialable from outside United States and Canada
so they wouldn't be written in international format.

Actually, they are. But the caller pays the international part according
to his contract.
--
Cheers, Carlos.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

On Sat, 26 Jul 2025 22:25:08 +0200, "Carlos E.R."
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

On 2025-07-26 21:18, micky wrote:

In alt.comp.software.firefox, on Sat, 26 Jul 2025 19:42:20 +0100, Andy
Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:

micky wrote:

The number to call was 855-470-8800.> I googled that number and the first hit I got was
<https://foxbaltimore.com/news/local/bge-reminds-customers-to-stay-vigilant-avoid-energy-related-scams>
Yet that number does not appear in the article. > Why was it listed in the search results?

The three individual numbers 855, 470 and 8800 *do* appear in the page,

Huh? I don't find any of those 3. Can you quote whole sentences?

Why don't you google directly for "8554708800" without quotes? Or even >"+18554708800". The third hit is BGE:

<https://www.bge.com/smart-energy/smart-grid-smart-meter/smart-meters>

+++++++++++++++++++++++
Please note: BGE is upgrading both electric and gas meters. If one of
your meters is outdoors and the other meter is indoors or otherwise >inaccessible, such as behind a gate, we may have upgraded your outdoor >meter, but we still need access to your additional meter. You will be >considered as opting out, and assessed the opt-out fees, unless we are
able to upgrade both meters. If one of your meters still needs to be >upgraded, please call BGE at 1-855-470-8800 to schedule an appointment. >++++++++++++++++++++++-

The number is legit.

Or possibly "was".
The link refers to meter-upgrades "beginning in April 2012" and hints
at being mostly complete. After 13 years, one would expect so...
A reverse lookup also reveals no current info; it would be strange for
a major utility company to be shy about its number usage.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

On Sat, 26 Jul 2025 23:55:55 +0200, "Carlos E.R."
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

On 2025-07-26 22:45, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

Why don't you google directly for "8554708800" without quotes? Or even
"+18554708800". The third hit is BGE:

Toll-free numbers aren't dialable from outside United States and Canada
so they wouldn't be written in international format.

Anyone using a cell phone is employing the 'international format'.

Actually, they are. But the caller pays the international part according
to his contract.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

On 2025-07-26 22:45, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

Why don't you google directly for "8554708800" without quotes? Or even >>>"+18554708800". The third hit is BGE:

Toll-free numbers aren't dialable from outside United States and Canada
so they wouldn't be written in international format.

Actually, they are. But the caller pays the international part according
to his contract.

Yes, it's possible but it's usually not done.

Why would the call center pay inward WATTS charges from countries
they have no practical means of serving?
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

In <1063m9e$2jk3c$1@dont-email.me> "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> writes:

Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

On 2025-07-26 22:45, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

Why don't you google directly for "8554708800" without quotes? Or even >>>>"+18554708800". The third hit is BGE:

Toll-free numbers aren't dialable from outside United States and Canada >>>so they wouldn't be written in international format.

Actually, they are. But the caller pays the international part according >>to his contract.

Yes, it's possible but it's usually not done.

Why would the call center pay inward WATTS charges from countries
they have no practical means of serving?

banks and credit card agencies, for two examples.
--
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dannyb@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

Nobody <jock@soccer.com> wrote:

On Sat, 26 Jul 2025 23:55:55 +0200, "Carlos E.R."
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

On 2025-07-26 22:45, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

Why don't you google directly for "8554708800" without quotes? Or even >>>> "+18554708800". The third hit is BGE:

Toll-free numbers aren't dialable from outside United States and Canada
so they wouldn't be written in international format.

Anyone using a cell phone is employing the 'international format'.

GSM phones dial in international format. I don't know about others.

Actually, they are. But the caller pays the international part according >>to his contract.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

In alt.comp.software.firefox, on Sat, 26 Jul 2025 17:24:48 -0400, "Alan
K." <alan@invalid.com> wrote:

On 7/26/25 3:19 PM, micky wrote:

In alt.comp.software.firefox, on Sat, 26 Jul 2025 19:52:18 +0100, Andy
Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:

micky wrote:

I too dislike the so-called AI, which takes up space so that I have to >>>> scroll down to get to what I want to see.

append the following to your search URL
&udm=14

Thanks. I hope someone will write an add-on to automate this. I
woudln't know where to start.

And what does udm do?

Wasn't it clear from what I wrote that I didn't know such an add-on
exists? You could have been helpful like Frank was, but you'd rather be sarcastic. It's so nice that the internet make anonymity so easy.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

In alt.comp.software.firefox, on Sat, 26 Jul 2025 22:53:34 -0000 (UTC),
"Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

On 2025-07-26 22:45, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

Why don't you google directly for "8554708800" without quotes? Or even >>>>"+18554708800". The third hit is BGE:

Toll-free numbers aren't dialable from outside United States and Canada >>>so they wouldn't be written in international format.

Actually, they are. But the caller pays the international part according >>to his contract.

Yes, it's possible but it's usually not done.

Why would the call center pay inward WATTS charges from countries
they have no practical means of serving?

For the same reason cc companies accept collect calls, advise you on the
card to call collect. For the sake of customers who are permanently or temporarily in those countries. I've called one of my credit card
companies in the USA from abroad on 3 separate occasions, but I'm not
saying I used an 800 number. I don't remember.


FWIW
Two different gas stations, from the same chain, charged me for twice as
much gas as would fit in the tank. Finally I learned that they tend to
put a hold on a large amount that they reduce later, but since one is
done filling the tank in 5 miniutes, why don't they correct the amount
after 10 minutes, or 30, or when the pump shows that the pumping session
has ended. Instead it takes them days. Very strange.
I saw a vending machine in southern Virgiania that took credit cards
and had a sign on it warning people that they would be charged 3x the
price of the candy bar, until the charge was adjusted later. Very
strange.

Once my card was stolen.

Once I lost a card. That was a Capitol ONe card. For years they
advertised No foreign exchange fees, obviously courting those who travel internationally. So before a trip I got a card. When I lost it I
wanted to log in on the laptop or the phone to report it, and see if
charges had been made against it. But of course they wanted to verify it
was me.... by calling my cell phone. But my cell phone was with me, in
another country with a different sim and a different phone number. Maybe
they would have called my home phone but there was no one there to
answer. They apparently didn't plan for this, despite courting
international travelers. When I called on the phone they oouldn't
figure out what to do. He said I should have used the phone app before
leaving the US. Now they tell me. Afaik, they still have not fixed
this. I'm glad I take 2 credit cards and 2 debit cards when I travel.
Some other banks or credit card compaies give up to six ways to confirm, including email addresses. Not Capitol One, only phone numbers.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:

Sat, 26 Jul 2025 22:53:34 -0000 (UTC), Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com>: >>Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

On 2025-07-26 22:45, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

Why don't you google directly for "8554708800" without quotes? Or even >>>>>"+18554708800". The third hit is BGE:

Toll-free numbers aren't dialable from outside United States and Canada >>>>so they wouldn't be written in international format.

Actually, they are. But the caller pays the international part according >>>to his contract.

Yes, it's possible but it's usually not done.

Why would the call center pay inward WATTS charges from countries
they have no practical means of serving?

For the same reason cc companies accept collect calls, advise you on the
card to call collect. For the sake of customers who are permanently or >temporarily in those countries. I've called one of my credit card
companies in the USA from abroad on 3 separate occasions, but I'm not
saying I used an 800 number. I don't remember.

If I anticipated this I wouldn't call on the toll free number. Airlines
always have regular numbers to call from abroad.

FWIW
Two different gas stations, from the same chain, charged me for twice as
much gas as would fit in the tank. Finally I learned that they tend to
put a hold on a large amount that they reduce later, but since one is
done filling the tank in 5 miniutes, why don't they correct the amount
after 10 minutes, or 30, or when the pump shows that the pumping session
has ended. Instead it takes them days. Very strange.

You weren't charged. A hold is not a charge. The hold does not go to the merchant. A hold is a temporary reduction of your credit limit. Yes, it
should be released once the final bill is known but it's always released
by the next banking day.

I saw a vending machine in southern Virgiania that took credit cards
and had a sign on it warning people that they would be charged 3x the
price of the candy bar, until the charge was adjusted later. Very
strange.

I cannot image how that's not disallowed under network rules. There is
no reason for it.

. . .

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

"Carlos E.R." wrote:

Why don't you google directly for "8554708800" without quotes?

Because I don't think the question was about finding the phone number,
it was about why, having searched for the phone number did the results apparently not contain what had been searched for ...

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

On 2025-07-27 00:53, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

On 2025-07-26 22:45, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

Why don't you google directly for "8554708800" without quotes? Or even >>>> "+18554708800". The third hit is BGE:

Toll-free numbers aren't dialable from outside United States and Canada
so they wouldn't be written in international format.

Actually, they are. But the caller pays the international part according
to his contract.

Yes, it's possible but it's usually not done.

Why would the call center pay inward WATTS charges from countries
they have no practical means of serving?

For example, you are abroad and you have to call your bank, or your air
ship company. And the number you have is the toll free one. No problem,
you dial, it works, but you pay the international part of the fee. It is
all planned in the international contracts between the providers.
--
Cheers, Carlos.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

In alt.comp.software.firefox, on Sun, 27 Jul 2025 07:02:27 -0000 (UTC),
"Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

FWIW
Two different gas stations, from the same chain, charged me for twice as >>much gas as would fit in the tank. Finally I learned that they tend to
put a hold on a large amount that they reduce later, but since one is
done filling the tank in 5 miniutes, why don't they correct the amount >>after 10 minutes, or 30, or when the pump shows that the pumping session >>has ended. Instead it takes them days. Very strange.

You weren't charged. A hold is not a charge.

Yes, I know now that it was a hold, but the email and the webpage made
no distinction between a charge and a hold. Other gas stations in the
same country charged only for the gas I actually took. And they know
when the nozzle has been put back onto the pump, because if you try to
start pumping again, it again wants your credit card, to start a new trasnaction. So by the time you're done pumping, they know you're done
and what the final charge is. So they could replace the hold with a
charge then, like the other gas stations did.

The hold does not go to the
merchant. A hold is a temporary reduction of your credit limit. Yes, it >should be released once the final bill is known but it's always released
by the next banking day.

Not always that quickly, at least not that bank then.

I saw a vending machine in southern Virgiania that took credit cards
and had a sign on it warning people that they would be charged 3x the
price of the candy bar, until the charge was adjusted later. Very >>strange.

I cannot image how that's not disallowed under network rules. There is
no reason for it.

. . .

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

In alt.comp.software.firefox, on Sun, 27 Jul 2025 08:41:30 +0100, Andy
Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:

"Carlos E.R." wrote:

Why don't you google directly for "8554708800" without quotes?

I did that.

Because I don't think the question was about finding the phone number,
it was about why, having searched for the phone number did the results >apparently not contain what had been searched for ...

Yes, that's right. BTW. I'm still going to reply to your previous post,
but that will take some time. Getting rid of short tasks first.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:

Sun, 27 Jul 2025 07:02:27 -0000 (UTC), Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com>:

FWIW
Two different gas stations, from the same chain, charged me for twice as >>>much gas as would fit in the tank. Finally I learned that they tend to >>>put a hold on a large amount that they reduce later, but since one is >>>done filling the tank in 5 miniutes, why don't they correct the amount >>>after 10 minutes, or 30, or when the pump shows that the pumping session >>>has ended. Instead it takes them days. Very strange.

You weren't charged. A hold is not a charge.

Yes, I know now that it was a hold, but the email and the webpage made
no distinction between a charge and a hold.

Then you misread something or misunderstood. If you aren't paying it,
it's not a charge. It's a temporary hold on your credit.

Other gas stations in the same country charged only for the gas I actually >took.

The gas station in question charged you for the gas you purchased. If
they charged you for gas you didn't purchase, that's fraud.

And they know
when the nozzle has been put back onto the pump, because if you try to
start pumping again, it again wants your credit card, to start a new >trasnaction. So by the time you're done pumping, they know you're done
and what the final charge is. So they could replace the hold with a
charge then, like the other gas stations did.

It's still not a charge. The hold monies aren't paid to the merchant.
You've gotten this completely wrong.

The hold does not go to the
merchant. A hold is a temporary reduction of your credit limit. Yes, it >>should be released once the final bill is known but it's always released
by the next banking day.

Not always that quickly, at least not that bank then.

Dude, if it's not released by the next banking day, then you've got a
complaint against the credit card network as they aren't following their
own rules. It's not the merchant placing the credit hold but its bank.
If the hold hasn't been released, then their bank failed to follow the
rules they are obliged to follow. You make a complaint through your
bank. Even if the banks fail to follow the rules, the merchant still
isn't going to receive money from you because a hold is not a charge.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

In alt.comp.software.firefox, on Sun, 27 Jul 2025 16:20:05 -0000 (UTC),
"Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:

Sun, 27 Jul 2025 07:02:27 -0000 (UTC), Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com>:

FWIW
Two different gas stations, from the same chain, charged me for twice as >>>>much gas as would fit in the tank. Finally I learned that they tend to >>>>put a hold on a large amount that they reduce later, but since one is >>>>done filling the tank in 5 miniutes, why don't they correct the amount >>>>after 10 minutes, or 30, or when the pump shows that the pumping session >>>>has ended. Instead it takes them days. Very strange.

You weren't charged. A hold is not a charge.

Yes, I know now that it was a hold, but the email and the webpage made
no distinction between a charge and a hold.

Then you misread something or misunderstood.

Oh please. How do you know what my credit card company sends me?

If you aren't paying it,
it's not a charge.

That's not what makes it not a charge, because I'm not paying it until
the end of the month even if it is a charge.

It's a temporary hold on your credit.

Other gas stations in the same country charged only for the gas I actually >>took.

The gas station in question charged you for the gas you purchased. If
they charged you for gas you didn't purchase, that's fraud.

You're still relying on what you think is my careless use of charge vs.
hold. You know I didn't say the final charge was more than I bought.

And they know
when the nozzle has been put back onto the pump, because if you try to >>start pumping again, it again wants your credit card, to start a new >>trasnaction. So by the time you're done pumping, they know you're done
and what the final charge is. So they could replace the hold with a
charge then, like the other gas stations did.

It's still not a charge.

In the previous 4+ lines I called it a hold. How many times are you
going to make an issue of my calling it a charge earlier.

The hold monies aren't paid to the merchant.

But they look like they are, when no distinction is made between a hold
and a charge.

You've gotten this completely wrong.

Nope.

The hold does not go to the
merchant. A hold is a temporary reduction of your credit limit. Yes, it >>>should be released once the final bill is known but it's always released >>>by the next banking day.

Not always that quickly, at least not that bank then.

Dude, if it's not released by the next banking day, then you've got a >complaint against the credit card network as they aren't following their
own rules.

How do you know what this bank's rules are? I'm not sure but my
recollection is that it took 3 or 4 days. Why should I complain? I
don't pay the bill until the end of the billing month. Unless I was
really short of credit and bought an awful lot of gas (or something else
that did this) the problem is not how long they keep the hold. The
problem is that they don't distinguish between a hold and a charge, and
when one doesn't know about holds and/or can't fathom why one would be
needed once the pump turns off, it's alarming to be get an email that
lists an amount 2 or 3x what the real bill was.

BTW, I complained at one of the two gas stations and the manager didn't
speak much English. He said two or three times just two English words
that meant I would't have to pay, but he didn't know enough English to
say more. He knew right off the bat what I was complaining about and he
had clearly gotten the same complaint several or many times before. Once
I found out what had happened, I printed out an apology/explanation, so
he could show it to someone who would translate, and he got the idea,
smiled, and gave me an ice coffee.

It's not the merchant placing the credit hold but its bank.
If the hold hasn't been released, then their bank failed to follow the
rules they are obliged to follow.

Maybe, but I don't care.

You make a complaint through your

You complain if you want to. I don't care.

bank. Even if the banks fail to follow the rules, the merchant still
isn't going to receive money from you because a hold is not a charge.

You've said that 4 times.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.software.firefox

micky wrote:
[..snip..] Offtopic shit

You've said that 4 times.

You've posted offtopic shit way more than 4 times the last half year.
So please fuck off and die.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2