activistPnk

joined 1 year ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

URL gives me a 404 error. But I found this link that mentions it which is both working and Cloudflare-free:

https://www.b-europe.com/EN/Blog/Night-trainshttps://www.b-europe.com/EN/Routes/Brussels-Vienna

From the site:

Travel at high speed and in all comfort between Brussels and Vienna.

I suppose all trains are sustainable but night trains are typically more sustainable because they tend to be slow (more efficient) trains. But the Brussels-Vienna train is fast. Though if it gets people off planes I guess it still scores some points for that.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

I love the convenience of the electric ones and the programmability. But tech ethics makes them a minefield. One advantage of the manual ones is they can do much higher pressures. The so while the electric ones give more control by giving programs and timers, they give less control over the pressure level. IIRC the InstantPot just has low and high. And “high” pressure is still relatively low.

Ideally we need a FOSS pressure cooker.

 

Not sure if this has been scientifically studied but I’ve noticed a couple situations where continuous heat can be avoided.

My mom’s way of cooking corn on the cob: bring a pot of water to boil, lid off with two wooden spoons resting on the top to prevent boiling over. She keeps the heat continously quite high for what, ~30—40 min? Seems wasteful because with the lid off the pot is evaporative cooling the whole time so more heat is needed to offset the cooling. I just tried it this way: bring to boil with lid on. Shut the burner off as soon as it boils. The corn continues cooking as the water temp drops. I could probably improve on that even more by using a pressure cooker. (I’m stalling on buying one because I boycott InstantPot due to the fact that they have a closed source phone app exclusively in Google Playstore; it’s optional but InstantPot buyers are still financing that. I should probably get a 2nd hand manual pressure cooker).

Hydrating dried beans: soak overnight (which I skip because it seems to make little progress). So I do the “quick soak” -- bring to boil with lid on, turn off right away, and let them sit ½ the day in warm water. Pressure cooking speeds up the 2nd stage cooking for sure (I’ve tested with other people’s pressure cookers). Since I don’t have a pressure cooker, I end up doing the quick soak method ~3 or 4 times throughout the day.. which just means bring to a boil then shut off. Anecdotally this seems to reduce the time needed in the final phase of cooking.

Am I going OCD on this? This all might be a drop in the ocean.. cooking is not a significant portion of energy consumption. But maybe notable in the summer when cooling systems have to work against the kitchen heat. Which is one reason I like the electronic pressure cookers: I can set the pressure cooker outside.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

This is what we find in the Sherman act link you supplied:

A Section 1 violation has three elements:

(1) an agreement;
(2) which unreasonably restrains competition; and
(3) which affects interstate commerce.

(emphasis mine)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (3 children)

It’s a good principle but I think it /is/ legal for Bob to do that because Bob could do it without explicit agreements. They give the sensitive info to Bob (which is legal outside of San Francisco) and Bob suggests prices. Without agreements in place they simply trust that Bob’s hint will work to their benefit and they follow along on the basis of trust rather than agreement.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

from the article:

The challenge is this: Under existing antitrust law, showing that companies A and B used algorithm C to raise prices isn’t enough; you need to show that there was some kind of agreement between companies A and B, and you need to allege some specific factual basis that the agreement existed before you can formally request evidence of it.

What normally happens with pricing shenanigans is there is no agreement. The companies develop a code to signal to each other through advertisements. E.g. company X runs a 10% sale on product A, and company Y sees a pattern and reacts in a way that signals back to company X. X and Y learn each other’s language and have a coded conversation through published ads. AFAIK, that’s anti-competitive but legal because no agreement is in place. The AI seems like a new legal loophole that’s much more convenient and efficient than the coded conversation. Prosecutors might find an agreement that makes their job trivial. But what if they don’t? I don’t see how agreements are needed given that the coded ad conversation does not involve an explicit agreement as it’s just a pattern that both “competitors” (collaborators) benefit from. These cheaters operate with an understanding among each other, not an “agreement”. Hence:

None of the situations Stucke and Ezrachi describe involve an explicit agreement, making them almost impossible to prosecute under existing antitrust laws.

As long as republicans have a significant piece of Congress, the AI price fixing will prevail. Dems would oppose it across the board, but republicans would be divided. Trump and his faction would favor price fixing while the truer conservatives among the republicans would oppose it. But there are probably too many Trumpers.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

from the article:

Similar complaints have been brought against companies in industries as varied as health insurance, tire manufacturing, and meat processing.

I guess any self-respecting environmentalists would just look the other way on the meat processing price fixing. I might welcome anti-competition in markets of unsustainable products where inflation is a benefit. The meat market is too big. If meat prices increase wildly, that leads to an increase of vegetarians.

 

An important part of the Youtube content is the transcript at the bottom of the video description. There are some 3rd-party sites that collect and share the YT transcripts separately but then the naive admins put the service in Cloudflare’s walled garden, which is worse than YT itself and purpose-defeating to a large extent. (exceptionally this service is CF-free, but it says “Transcript is disabled on this video” in my test: https://youtubetranscript.io)

Invidious should be picking up the slack here.

And Lemmy could do better by automatically fetching the transcript of youtube/invidious links and include it, perhaps spoiler style like this.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

I would give that a mostly true. Banks and credit unions are both such a shit show that a big stash of cash is important. But I must say some comments are not exactly spot on:

So for most people, they [credit unions] are just as secure as the big national chains.

They missed something big:

  • Most credit unions have put their website on Cloudflare in the past few years. Which means:
    • Consumers are generally forced to expose their account credentials to a privacy-abusing tech giant (while agreeing to be accountable for damage stemming from credential leakage)
    • Consumers are generally forced to expose to their credit union their approximate physical location every single time they connect to the website as a consequence of Cloudflare. Which means if they move outside of the CUs service area some CUs will notice that and even freeze/lock your account. They tend to admit directly in their privacy policy that they collect IP addresses specifically for geolocation tracking of their customers.
    • Consumers are generally forced to expose to their ISP where they bank as a consequence of Cloudflare. And considering Trump overturned an Obama policy that required ISPs to obtain consent for collecting and selling customer personal data, there is nothing to stop your ISP from selling info about where you bank to data brokers and debt collectors.
    • Cloudflare can at any moment decide to block you for any reason arbitrarily, and suddenly your web access to your money is gone.
    • Consumers who are behind CGNAT outside of their control are often blocked by Cloudflare. If a snot-nose script kiddie in your CGNAT pool decides to scrape some websites, CF’s excessive protectionism might kick in and block the IP which could go to you next, and you lose access to your money because CF overreacted to a harmless snotnose kid.
  • Most credit unions have outsourced just about every aspect of their business. They are like shell companies all working as many different façades to the same giant corporations. CUs in-house expertise doesn’t go far beyond their branding and marketing. They all outsource billpay to 1 or 2 different billpay services. They all outsource monthly statement generation to the same few corps, as well as statement printing. So that means that your sensitive financial info gets shared around with a handful of giant corporations while giving the illusion that you have the privacy benefits of a small CU.
  • Credit unions spam the shit out of whatever email address you supply, thus enabling all entities handling the email to see where you bank each time the CU decides to spam you.

Being free from Cloudflare sometimes means you can login over Tor and avoid most of the problems above. Many commercial banks block Tor increasingly more frequently lately (because they also want to track your physical whereabouts), but there may be some Cloudflare-free CUs that still permit Tor logins.

If you cannot find a bank or CU that gives you the privacy of Tor, the best feature to look for is gratis paper statements and paper checks so you can scrap the website and take back your privacy. It’s more common to find gratis paper statements from banks than CUs.

Credit unions offer FDIC-like protection through the NCUSIF,

It’s a shit show. The NCU does not protect people. Sure they may give security in the very basic deposit insurance scenario of a CU going under, but if you report unlawful conduct by your CU to NCU they just ignore it. They do not act on consumer protection law infringement even though it’s in their jurisdiction.

Also, smaller banks and credit unions usually can’t compete with the big banks’ digital offerings.

Not sure about that. Credit unions do not write their own software. You have a 1 or 2 closed-source Google Playstore banking app makers who all the credit unions outsource to. Whereas every commercial bank reinvents the wheel with their own implementation. For me it’s a shitshow no matter what. I am not going to enter Google Playstore and tell Google where I bank and let Google track exactly which software version I have which also reveals what vulns I inherit, to then run a closed-source app that snoops on me in countless unknown ways. Fuck all that. But anyway, with all credit unions outsourcing to centralised giant single supplier, I’m sure the result is comparable to large banks.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I wish Lemmy servers were smarter in how they handle youtube links. As a text-based medium it would be useful to have transcripts for those on limited connections and also for quoting. Anyway, here it is:

the transcript:0:03 Ever notice how TV commercials for big banks go really hard on the shmaltz?
0:13 Loving families, cute babies, sweet old retired people, micropigs on leashes.
0:18 It’s almost as if they’re trying to distract us from something…
0:22 Oh, you mean like how in 2016 Wells Fargo admitted to creating 3.5 million fake accounts
0:29 for customers to collect extra fees, and charged over 570,000 people for auto insurance they
0:35 didn’t need, resulting in over 20,000 customers going into defaults?
Big banks
0:41 And then there’s the now infamous practices of Citibank, Lehman Bros, AIG and other Wall
0:45 Street giants of bundling toxic “junk” assets and repackaging them as AAA super-safe
0:51 investments, which led to a near collapse of the international money system that ordinary
0:56 people are still hurting from.
0:57 And most Americans feel that big banks are rewarded rather than punished for risky and
1:02 predatory behavior.
1:03 Bank of America received tens of billions in bail-out funds in 2009, only to turn around
1:09 the very next year and pay $35 billion in executive bonuses!
1:14 Not surprisingly, our trust in these institutions is low.
1:17 A recent gallup poll showed that only 27% of Americans have confidence in banks.
1:22 But this is not a new phenomenon.14th-century poet Dante placed money-lenders in the 7th
1:28 circle of hell, below violent murderers and blasphemers!.
1:31 So, being suspicious of big banks is nothing new, but what can you do?
1:35 You’ve got to stash your cash somewhere, and who can get through life without ever
1:40 taking out a loan or using a credit card?
1:42 Thankfully, you do have options.
1:45 Alternatives to big banks have been around for a long time, and if you haven’t looked
1:47 into them yet, it might be time.
Alternative banks
1:58 One good alternative is a local community bank.
2:01 Their fees and charges can be lower than national chains, and you can be pretty sure they won’t
2:05 use your money for risky bets or Wall Street gambles.
2:08 Community banks also tend to make investments in the immediate region, helping to develop
2:13 projects and businesses that create jobs and improve spaces in your hometown.
2:18 There are over 52,000 community bank locations nationwide and you can find ones in your area
2:24 by checking out the ICBA’s website.
2:26 Then there are banks that have no physical location whatsoever: Online-based banks like
2:30 SIMPLE and CHIME usually have lower fees partly due to having no brick-and-mortar expenses.
2:35 They also tend to have no account minimums, don’t charge overdraft fees, and ATMs are
2:40 fee-free at over 30,000 locations.
2:43 Both local banks and online-based banks still typically offer FDIC protection on up to $250,000
2:49 worth of deposits per person and account type.
2:53 So for most people, they are just as secure as the big national chains.
2:57 You could also choose to ditch banks all together, and open up an account at a credit union.
3:03 Credit unions allow you to make deposits and withdrawals, take out loans and credit cards,
3:08 and enjoy most other services you might expect from a bank.
3:10 But unlike banks, credit unions are all non-profit entities.
3:15 Any profits made by the credit union are returned to you in the form of reduced fees, higher
3:20 savings rates, and better loan terms.
3:22 This is because credit unions technically don’t have “customers”--they have “members”.
3:27 Everyone who keeps their money at a credit union is seen as a part owner of the institution.
3:33 And they usually all share a common bond - perhaps they all live in a particular geographic location,
3:39 work in the same industry, or are all alumni of the same university.
3:43 One member’s deposits end up becoming an auto or business loan for another member.
3:48 Teamwork!
3:49 Credit unions offer FDIC-like protection through the NCUSIF, and most credit unions are part
3:54 of a national shared-branch network which allows you to bank at thousands of other credit
3:59 unions just like they were your own.
4:01 So depending on your credit union, you could have access to even more ATMs and branches
4:06 than with a big national bank.
4:08 Maybe this all sounds great to you, and you’re ready to say sayonara to your big bank, but
4:13 there are a few drawbacks to consider before making the switch.
4:17 Because of their size and scope, big banks are better at international banking and lending.
4:22 Making a withdrawal from abroad or getting a loan in another country can be a tall order
4:26 for many local banks and credit unions.
4:28 So if you do a lot of travelling or have a cross-border business, sticking with a big
4:32 bank can make your life easier.
4:34 Also, smaller banks and credit unions usually can’t compete with the big banks’ digital
4:39 offerings.
4:40 So if things like banking apps, budgeting software and online accounting tools are important
4:44 to you, be sure to inquire about the technological support they offer.
4:49 Even though these advantages come from big banks’ huge size, in their ads they often
4:53 go out of their way to portray themselves as homey, familiar, even rustic.
4:58 It’s as if they’re saying that little local organizations are more trustworthy.
5:02 So, if you find these commercials persuasive, maybe you should check out the smaller organizations
5:08 in your neighborhood.
5:10 And that’s our two cents!

 

The linked PDF is the EU’s proposal to amend the current ADR¹ policy. One favorable change for consumers is that traders will have a duty to respond to the ADR agencies. But I also see regressions for consumers. E.g. the EU wants to remove the requirement that traders inform consumers about ADR entities. I only read the first 6 pages or so but it looks like the changes will overall weaken consumer protection.

I try to consume as little as possible and live somewhat as a minimalist. But I still get ripped off plenty and want protection. OTOH, I wonder if weakened consumer protections will perhaps create more minimalists who ditch their consumerist habits out of frustration with lack of protections.

¹ alternative dispute resolution

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

The nationwide fuckup in the US is zoning rules that block commercial venues from residential regions, which means people cannot step outside their front door and get groceries in a 1 block walk. People are forced to travel unwalkable distances to reach anything, like food and employment. Which puts everyone in a car. Which means huge amounts of space is needed for wide roads and extensive car parking, generally big asphalt lots, which exacerbates the problem because even more space is wasted which requires everything to be spread out even more, putting resources out of the reach of cyclists. Making the city mostly concrete and asphalt also means water draining problems where less of it makes it into the soil and groundwater, and it means the city temp is higher because of less evaporative cooling from the land mass (Arizona in particular).

This foolishness is all done for pleasant window views, so everyone can have a view of neighbors gardens instead of a shop front.

Europe demonstrates smarter zoning, where you often have a shop on the ground level and housing above it. You don’t need a car because everything is in walking or cycling distance. But you more likely have an unpleasant view.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Well that depends on how equipped you are. One cool thing about compressors is you can straight up connect a PV directly to a compressor with no voltage regulators or anything. So if you have a simple setup like that, I can see up front cost effectiveness in storing ice. But if you already have batteries, and thus voltage regulators and all the costly intermediate components to make that possible, then I would agree.. I might rather store it in lead acid batteries as that would be more versatile.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Sounds like they would do well in Arizona, where the air is dry. IIUC swamp coolers were very popular in Arizona until ~20 years ago when temps increased so much that swamp coolers could not make enough difference (this is largely because more and more land became concrete, which reduced the effect of evaporative cooling the land mass). So a/c became more popular in AZ IIUC. But the dry air would still be dry.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Great basic concept but I think I would benefit more for the stored cooling going toward ice cubes for mojitos.

I don’t imagine that a single family dwelling would benefit from the extra complexity of adding cold water pipes in all the floors of the house. Probably makes more sense for apartment buildings (or perhaps homes that already have hydrothermal floors for heating).

1
submitted 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
 

The article does not state how she paid and got caught, but this should serve as a situation that highlights the importance of cash preservation.

(update) prosecution seeks a 15 year sentence.

2
submitted 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
 

I browse with images disabled. But sometimes I encounter a post where I want to see the image, like this one:

https://iejideks5zu2v3zuthaxu5zz6m5o2j7vmbd24wh6dnuiyl7c6rfkcryd.onion/@[email protected]/112923392848232303

When opening that link in a browser configured to fetch images, it redirects to the original instance, which is inside an access-restricted walled garden. This seems like a new behaviour for Mastodon thus may be a regression.

It’s a terrible design because it needlessly forces people on open decentralised networks into centralised walled gardens. The behaviour arises out of the incorrect assumption that everyone has equal access. As Cloudflare proves, access equality is non-existent. The perversion in this particular case is an onion is redirecting to Cloudflare (an adversary to all those who have onion access).

There should be two separate links to each post: one to the source node, and one to the mirror. This kind of automatic redirect is detrimental. Lemmy demonstrates the better approach of giving two links and not redirecting. (But Lemmy has that problem of not mirroring images).

 

cross-posted from: https://slrpnk.net/post/12108012

The EU guarantees most people a right to open a “basic”¹ bank account. Superficially that sounds good, but of course having a right to open a bank account implies that you can then be expected to have an account. It’s an enabler for the #warOnCash. The right to a bank account is a masquerade of freedom from which oppression manifests.

Anyway, you have to ask: do you really have a “right” to open a basic bank account if the procedure for opening the account is inherently exclusive? That is, if a bank only offers a basic account to people who are online, doesn’t a problem arise when this right to an account then leads to an assumption that everyone has an account?

Some banks take the requirement to offer basic accounts seriously by making the application a static PDF which can also be obtained on paper form. So the only thing you need is a pen (to open the account and presumably to use it). But it’s bizarre some banks put the application for their basic account exclusively in an interactive online format. Are offline people just getting “lucky” if a bank happens to offer a basic account application on paper?

¹ “basic” is not just common language here. It refers to a specific type of account that fulfills specific legal criteria.

 

The EU guarantees most people a right to open a “basic”¹ bank account. Superficially that sounds good, but of course having a right to open a bank account implies that you can then be expected to have an account. It’s an enabler for the #warOnCash. The right to a bank account is a masquerade of freedom from which oppression manifests.

Anyway, you have to ask: do you really have a “right” to open a basic bank account if the procedure for opening the account is inherently exclusive? That is, if a bank only offers a basic account to people who are online, doesn’t a problem arise when this right to an account then leads to an assumption that everyone has an account?

Some banks take the requirement to offer basic accounts seriously by making the application a static PDF which can also be obtained on paper form. So the only thing you need is a pen (to open the account and presumably to use it). But it’s bizarre some banks put the application for their basic account exclusively in an interactive online format. Are offline people just getting “lucky” if a bank happens to offer a basic account application on paper?

¹ “basic” is not just common language here. It refers to a specific type of account that fulfills specific legal criteria.

 

There are some very slow nodes (like Beehaw) where the server is apparently so overworked it cannot render a login form most of the time. The browser times out waiting. In the rare moments that there is a login opportunity, about ½ the time the login fails with a 2 second popup saying “incorrect login credentials”.

It’s quite terrible because obviously users would assume their account has been deleted


because that’s how most online services work. Admins do not generally give warnings or say why an account is deleted. They just hit the delete button. Like Marvin in Office Space who was not told he was laid off.. they just “fixed the payroll glitch”. This is generally how communication works on communication platforms.. admins just pull the plug.

So because of how people learn that their account is deleted, users cannot distinguish a purposeful account removal from a faulty server. If you have a Beehaw account and you are told “incorrect login credentials”, don’t believe it. Keep trying. Eventually you’ll get in.

 

ecfr.gov used to be a decent source for looking up laws. When looking up the anti spam laws, the linked page is littered with links to an access-restricted Cloudflare site (www.govinfo.gov). The important parts of the law are missing from ecfr.gov. It’s common for various states to have this mom-pop shop competency level, but tragic and embarrassing that the US feds lack competency to the point of Cloudflare-dependency.

Often Cornell University publishes federal law and mitigates the embarrassment to some extent. But when looking up the CAN-SPAM law at Cornell, the Cornell law site redirects to another access-restricted Cloudflare site (www.gpo.gov).

There needs to be a fundamental high-level that requires all laws to be accessible to all people, not just people who Cloudflare is willing to give access to.

 

If you need to pay someone in the US, it’s interesting that you can walk into the bank used by the recipient and make a deposit into their account. You just need to know their account number and IIRC that even works with cash. There is generally no fee. Sometimes tenants and landlords have that arrangement.

Anyone know if that’s possible in Europe? Does it depend on the bank? I know the conventional way in Europe is to bring cash into the post office, and the post office will take the cash and transfer the money to the recipient. But there is a transaction fee and I think a restriction as well that the payer must be a resident. Can a payer go direct to the recipient’s bank and get service, ideally without a fee?

 

In the stock Lemmy web client there is apparently no mechanism for users to fetch their history of posts. The settings page gives only a way to download settings. This contrasts with Mastodon where users can grab an archive of everything they have posted which is still stored on the server.

Or am I missing something?

IIUC, there is no GDPR issue here because no data is personal (because all Lemmy accounts are anonymous). But if a Lemmy server were to hypothetically require users to identify themselves with first+last name, then the admin would have a substantial manual burden to comply with GDPR Art.20 requests. Correct?

 

cross-posted from: https://slrpnk.net/post/11937000

The article is normally paywalled but I prefixed 12ft.io/ to it, which worked for me. Google supposedly quit caching websites but old caches are still reachable with 12ft.io.

The UK’s GDPR might make it hard for banks to use people’s purchase data to derive their alcohol & tobacco habits, so apparently banks have to rely on interviews. Still, it would be foolish to rely on the GDPR. There are also stories of banks looking at spending data to deny mortgages, which I would guess is happening in a place without privacy safeguards like the US.

I’ll quote the article here as well:

Homebuyers could be forced to provide detailed information about the amount of money they spend on alcohol each month to qualify for a new mortgage under a new clampdown on reckless lending.

In a sweeping review of the mortgage market published today, the Financial Services Authority (FSA) said lenders needed to be far more rigorous about their financial checks of potential borrowers.

It said lenders should delve deeper into homebuyers’ personal spending including the amount they spend on alcohol and tobacco.

Spending on shoes, clothes and childcare could also be assessed under a new, industry-wide “affordability test”.

At present, the FSA does not prescribe rules about assessing a consumers’ ability to repay a mortgage and practices vary from one lender to the next.

In its document, the City regulator said: “There is clearly a responsibility on all lenders to extend credit only where a consumer can afford it and, in our view, a robust assessment of both income and expenditure is key to ensuring affordable mortgages.

“We propose to require all lenders to assess the level of a consumer’s expenditure in determining the affordability of a mortgage product, to ensure that lending decisions are based on a consumer’s free disposable income.”

It conceded though that there were some flaws with its plan with consumers potentially underestimating their spend or “failing to incorporate past experiences into their budgeting”.

The new measures, which aim to stamp out risky lending that has been criticised for compounding the financial crisis and tipping hundreds of thousands of homebuyers into negative equity, also include a plan to ban self-certified mortgages, dubbed “liar’s loans”, and to stop lenders from exploiting consumers who have fallen behind on their mortgage payments.

It also proposed that the FSA should regulate mortgages for landlords for the first time.

Self-certification mortgages were aimed at self-employed people with irregular incomes. The mortgages, which did not require proof of income, accounted for one third of new loans in 2007.

Their proposed banning was first revealed in The Times last week.

But the FSA stopped short of ruling out “supersized mortgages” by introducing caps on loan-to-value, loan-to-income or debt-to-income multiples.

Such mortgages were typified by Northern Rock which, at the height of the housing boom, offered 125 per cent home loan deals.

Gordon Brown wrote in a newspaper article at the weekend that it was “critical we end reckless banking practices that have left so many people worried about their finances”.

Jon Pain, managing director of supervision at the FSA, said: “The mortgage market has seen extraordinary upheaval over the past 18 months and while it has worked well for the vast majority of borrowers, some have suffered great financial distress. We recognise that we need to bring about a step change in regulation.”

He said there had been a “mutual assumption by too many borrowers and lenders that the good times could not end.”

The new reforms, he said, would ensure firms “only lend to people who can afford to pay back the money”.

But mortgage experts questioned the ease of imposing some of the new measures and expressed concern about the possible impact on homebuyers.

Ray Boulger, mortgage expert at John Charcol, said the new affordability test could prove difficult to implement. “I think it will be very difficult in practice to go into too much detail,” he said.

Homebuyers, he said, often forget the detail of their spending. “They will remember the weekly shop but not the £3 they spend on a sandwich each day.”

Paul Broadhead, head of mortgage policy at the Building Societies Association, said he had “significant reservations about the possible unintended consequences of some of the ideas.”

He said: “We believe that home ownership is something that should be encouraged, and it is vital that lenders retain the flexibility to respond to the very individual financial circumstances of individual borrowers.”

He added that self-certification mortgages were suitable for a minority of people and that an outright ban was “not appropriate.”

The Council of Mortgage Lenders said it was “important that the principle of consumer responsibility is not lost in such a regulatory environment, as it is a basic tenet upon which transactions of all kinds between firms and consumers rely”.

The report said there was a “clear and non-controversial case” for banning self-certification mortgages, instead compelling lenders to insist that customers provide evidence of their income.

“Our analysis shows that self-cert borrowers take out larger loan amounts than borrowers with standard products and fall into arrears much more frequently. To address these issues we propose to require verification of income for all mortgage applications,” it said.

The loans have been vilified as a significant contributor to the banks’ toxic loans problem because some customers have lied about their income. Defaults on self-cert repayments have been at much higher rates than the industry average.

HBOS and Bradford & Bingley were among the biggest self-cert lenders. HBOS was sold to Lloyds TSB in a rescue deal in September last year and B&B collapsed and had to be partially nationalised.

The plan to bring mortgages for landlords into the FSA’s scope for the first time was necessary the regulator said because of the big part the industry had played in “fuelling property price appreciation”

The FSA said: “As well as being a general contributor, buy-to-let funding funding has particularly helped to inflate prices of certain property types and locations such as city centre apartments.

“The overall impact on house prices inevitably has implications for our interest in the sustainability of the mortgage market.”

The market for buy-to-let mortgages has grown rapidly. Gross advances grew from £3.1 billion in 1999 to £44.6 billion in 2007.

The paper has been put out for consultation until early next year with a “feedback statement” to be published in March.

view more: next ›