fraud

50 years ago, an inventor introduced the first water engine. He was Spanish, a visionary and a complete fraud

by

“Of my patent, the license for Spain is transferred free of charge to the State for the benefit of all Spaniards.” Loud and clear, this is what Arturo Estévez Varela, the inventor of the water engine and, without a doubt, a great Spaniard. At least that’s what they must have thought. NODE viewerswhich in the early years of the 1970s included the words of this man from Extremadura. “That died with my father and we haven’t bothered to move it either,” said Arturo Estévez Jr. in a report for RTVE in 2009. Perhaps due to lack of knowledge or, probably, due to having too much knowledge. Knowledge that the invention, in reality, was completely unrealizable and that the patents shown to the journalist from the public entity have no value. But who was that man in a suit who drank from a jug before filling the tank of a motorcycle with water and made it work? Behind the name of Arturo Estévez Varela there was an inventor, an enormous visionary and, why not say it, also a scammer. Before his water engine, this Extremadura native born in Valle de la Serena (a small town of just over 1,000 inhabitants in the province of Badajoz) had already devised a chicken roaster with infrared and the “wing plane”, a device that allowed rockets to be recovered. Space X in Franco’s Spain. Arturo Estévez Varela in a demonstration of his invention With four liters of water, 900 kilometers of autonomy But if Arturo, who perhaps at this point we should start calling Don Arturo, became famous for something, it was for his water engine. An invention that, according to what he said, allowed you to travel by car 900 kilometers with just four liters of water. Statements included in the press of the time. It was October 1970 and, evidently, it seemed like magic. How did good old Don Arturo get a motorcycle he was taking around Spain running? Yes, with water, but also with hydrogen. Water was only one of the pillars of his invention. The third was hydrogen. And the second, a mystery. Town to town and city to city, Don Arturo traveled throughout Spain, generating a stir as he went, capturing the attention of the press and, as we have seen, also of the NODO. What this Extremaduran inventor did not reveal was what was hidden in that substance that, together with water, allowed the combustion engine of his motorcycle to work. In theory, the water reacted with a mineral that Arturo did not want to reveal. This reaction produced hydrogen which, when burned in the combustion engine, made the motorcycle work. That is, the procedure was similar to that have tried in Toyota. It is not a motor fuel cellis a combustion engine that burns hydrogen, a much more inefficient process. If we consult different sources on the Internet, many agree that the Francoism came to order a technical report to check if what that unknown inventor said was true. Obviously, everything was left in water, yes, but borage. missing These same sources end their story at the same point. Don Arturo was tireless in making himself heard, in convincing people and strangers that his invention worked and that it was the solution to many of Spain’s problems. However, it disappears. Nothing else was heard of him and the fables begin. Since the Franco regime tried to hide the invention until the oil companies decided to silence it. It seems that the secret, however, was not so secret. In this blog They recover a large part of press clippings from the time. Shortly after making himself known and without being listened to by the Government, Don Arturo managed to get someone to trust him. That someone was José Carrera Rey, a businessman who bought half of the rights to the invention at a price of six million pesetas. It is at that moment that Don Arturo loses track of him. José Carrera Rey then discovers that he has in his hands an invention that is useless. What it doesn’t have are six million pesetas and he doesn’t have a partner either. In desperation he denounces Don Arturo but nothing is heard from Don Arturo again. Only an indictment, in 1974, for an alleged crime of fraud, managed to get Don Arturo to appear in court. However, in December 1977 the magistrates were clear: Justice matters were already going very slowly in Spain and Don Arturo had not committed any crime of fraud because he believed in his invention, so there was no type of deception. Due to the dates on which the Spanish Television report was recorded and what his son says, Don Arturo died on the border of the 80s and 90s and took his secret to the grave. A secret which, according to the scientists who have studied the case, was boron. He boron It is a chemical element that, in reaction with water, produces hydrogen that, even, can become inflamed due to the enormous heat released. Hence, Don Arturo always warned that his “secret mineral” and water had to be mixed in controlled quantities. As collected The Vanguard last summer, the water engine, therefore, is perfectly functionalbut very little useful. To obtain 5 kg of hydrogen, with which a fuel cell Toyota Mirai (more efficient than burning hydrogen) travels about 600 kilometers, 45 liters of water and 19 kg of boron are needed. The problem is, basically, the 68,000 euros that 19 kg of boron would cost, according to what was reported in the Catalan newspaper. Was it functional? Of course, but, at its side, the first liter of synthetic and emissions-neutral fuel at 2,800 euros It no longer seems so expensive to us. Image | Commons In Xataka | The 194 kilometers that changed the history of the automobile have a first and last name: Bertha Benz In Xataka | The history of the first traffic light in Spain, installed in 1926: six lights … Read more

Galicia has proposed to put an end to the “zamburiñas fraud” once and for all. So he’s already issuing fines

by

The Spanish proverb warns about not being given a “cat in a hare”, but the most common deception when we talk about Spanish gastronomy of the 21st century is that they serve you a plate of volandeiras or Pacific scallops as if they were exclusive (and much more expensive) Galician zamburiñas. To an untrained eye the three bilvaves (volandeiras, scallops and scallops) are more or less similar to each other. The problem is that they are not the same and mixing their names violates regulations, represents unfair competition and (most seriously) deceives the client. That’s why in Galicia they have said enough. What has happened? That the Galician authorities they have gotten tired that in the community’s restaurants and bars they play with names, selling as “zamburiñas” dishes that actually contain two other species: volandeiras or Pacific scallops. It’s not just about passing off one thing as another. It is that, beyond the fact that the three are similar bivalves, their consideration it’s not the same. They do not match their prices. Nor its origin. Nor is its flavor exactly the same. Volandeiras and zamburiñas are shellfished in Galician banks (although with certain differences) and are usually sold fresh. The Pacific scallop is normally a frozen product that comes from aquaculture and arrives from Peru and Chile. Photos showing the exterior and interior of the right valve. Image A) corresponds to the “Mimachlamys varia” (zamburiña); B with Argopecten Purpuratus (Pacific scallop) and C with Aequipecten Opercularis (volandeira). And what have they done? Basically what the Galician authorities have done is investigate Yes, when a customer orders a portion of seafood in a bar in A Coruña, Vilagarcía, Ourense, Lugo… or any other Galician town, they are being served what they have ordered and not another product of more or less similar appearance. It’s not exactly something new. In September the local press has already advanced that the Xunta was carrying out an inspection campaign and that during the control they had found bars in which the menus advertised scallops when in reality what was served on the table were scallops or (sometimes) volandeiras. Has it stayed there? No. And that is the great news. The Voice just revealed that the controls carried out by the Resource Inspection and Control Service (SICOR) and Consumer Affairs officials have not been mere slaps on the wrist. They have also resulted in sanctions and fines. To be more precise, the newspaper speaks of the processing of just over 100 disciplinary proceedings since last summer for the use of incorrect commercial names: 53 to hospitality businesses in the province of A Coruña, 46 from Pontevedra, 14 from Lugo and 6 from Ourense. Among the ‘hunted’ there are not only bars, taverns and restaurants. There are also a few intermediaries. How much did it cost you? The Voice appointment at least one case in which the hotelier received a fine of 300 euros for advertising volandeiras and then serving scallops. The Xunta claims that before resorting to fines, a campaign was launched to remind professionals that they cannot mix terms and that a “deterrent effect” was even perceived, with hoteliers correcting their letters. Not even that has prevented there from being a hundred businesses with files. What is the problem? Basically, passing off one seafood as another (mixing commercial names) “violates traceability standards and can mislead the consumer,” the Xunta specifies. Not only does it confuse data related to traceability, but it goes against sales regulations and represents unfair competition against businesses that do respect the regulations. In fact, the problem is not limited to the zamburiñas alone. Are there more cases? That’s how it is. The majority of the files processed in Galicia are related to scallops, scallops and volanderias, but the inspectors also hunted down infractions that affect other merchandise. For example, passing off octopuses and barnacles as Galician seafood when in reality it comes from Moroccan waters. Agents also found cases in the food chain where farmed salmon and turbot were sold as wild. The Department of the Sea assures that there is no specific campaign and that the files are the result of “ordinary control work.” Regarding the sanctions, since these are minor infractions, the fines can reach 300 euros, although they remain at half (150 euros) if the offender meets certain requirements. Is there that much difference? Yes. Although in the hospitality industry we usually talk about “zamburiñas” in general, that word is reserved for a very specific species: Mimachlamys variaa sought-after bivalve appreciated for its flavor. The ‘Pesca de Galicia’ platform detailed on Monday the 26th that the kilo was priced in the markets at an average of 13.4 eurosfar above the volandeira (Aequipecten opercularis), which is also collected in Galicia, although it is more abundant. Things change when we talk about the Pacific scallop (Argopecten purpuratus), which is usually the result of aquaculture, is frozen and arrives from the coasts of Peru and Chile. The problem is that all three (scallops, scallops and scallops) are relatively similar, at least if you don’t have a trained eye. If the characteristics of their shells are known, it is easier to identify them. Does it only happen in Galicia? In 2020, a team from the University of Oviedo carried out a study which proved two things. First, the frequency with which the word Zamburiña is used “incorrectly” to refer to other species. Second, that “there exists widespread fraud in its commercialization in Asturias”. Your data is certainly compelling. After analyzing 148 different samples, they found that in 49% of the cases (73) the seafood was incorrectly labeled, presenting other bivalves, usually volandeiras, as scallops. How common is it? To complete their analysis, researchers from the University of Oviedo went to 20 restaurants and ordered dishes that were identified on the menu as “zamburiñas.” They were left wanting to taste them. “In 100% of the cases the species offered was the Pacific scallop,” reveals. The organization remembers that although there may not … Read more

We will increasingly see more “verified” SMS against fraud. The important thing is to understand how they really work

by

We live watching our cell phones and what appears on their screen, from a notice from the bank to a code to authorize a payment. This dependency has turned the text message into fertile ground for deception, with campaigns of smishing that imitate well-known companies and sneak into conversations that seem legitimate. The problem is not only technical, it is trust: distinguishing at a glance who is really on the other side. For years, SMS has treated legitimate and fraudulent messages equally, and that neutrality is exactly what attackers exploit. Malicious campaigns detected in Spain show how names and formats of known entities are copied to gain the trust of the recipient. These messages are designed not to raise suspicion. And often, when doubt arises, it is too late to react. Say ‘hello’ to verified messages. Faced with the erosion of trust in traditional SMS, the industry has chosen to reinforce the identity of the sender instead of placing all responsibility on the user. Verified messages introduce a relevant change: they make visible whether a company has been recognized as legitimate before the message reaches the mobile. Supported by the RCS protocolthese messages add a name, logo and verification indicators with the intention of reducing one of the main weapons of fraud, confusion about the real origin of the message. BBVA. This is how it looks on mobile. In Spain, BBVA has been one of the first large banks to show this change visibly for the user. On Android, the bank’s official messages are identified with its name and logo, accompanied by an indicator that indicates them as an official channel. By clicking on that logo, the user can verify that the associated data, such as the telephone number or website, match those of the bank. Furthermore, these communications arrive in a different thread than traditional SMS, precisely to prevent them from being mixed with fraudulent messages. Bankinter has also taken the leap. Bankinter has partnered with Telefónica to distribute verified messages. The entity explains This will improve the security of “critical communications”, such as single-use codes for transfers or online payments. Here we will also find the sender verification confirmation, the official logo and additional information such as the website and a telephone number. How verification works. Behind that visible badge there is a process much less obvious to the user. The standard defined by the GSMA establishes several preliminary stages before a company can send a single verified message. First, the entity must register its identity, with a specific name and logo, and submit it to external certification by a third party that validates that the entity can use that name and logo. This validation is not enough on its own: the authority that issues it must be included in the trusted list of the recipient’s operator. Without that complete string, the check simply doesn’t show. Who verifies who. Here the so-called Verification Authorities come into play as third parties in charge of validating that a company is who it says it is before it can send verified messages. That role may fall to private companies specialized in digital verification, mobile operators or even government entities, depending on the deployment and the country. Afterwards, it is the user’s operator who decides whether they trust that authority, something that is sometimes reflected visibly in the message itself, as occurs in an official Bankinter example, where the system indicates that the verification has been carried out by Movistar. The final verification occurs when the message reaches the phone. According to the GSMA standard, the messaging app automatically downloads the sender’s profile and runs a series of technical checks before displaying any badge. It is checked that the signature is still valid, that the authority that issued it is accepted by the user’s operator and that the data has not been altered. Only if everything fits does the verification indicator appear; If something fails, the message loses that appearance of legitimacy. Does it work on iOS and Android? This scheme is not exclusive to Android. Apple added support for RCS as a carrier service starting with iOS 18, allowing you to send and receive messages with advanced features when not using iMessage. In practice, the behavior is the same: if the operator supports RCS and the standard is implemented, the system can display the name, logo and indicators associated with the sender. Without this support from the operator, the message returns to the familiar terrain of SMS or MMS, without additional verification signals. For the user, the practical learning is simple: a verified message offers more context and more clues than a conventional SMS, but it does not eliminate the need to remain cautious. Knowing that there is a technical process behind that distinction helps us better interpret what reaches our mobile phones and be wary when something does not match. However, in an environment where malicious actors never sleep, caution remains essential. Images | Vitaly Gariev | BBVA | Bankinter | Gemini 3 Pro In Xataka | Cybersecurity experts by day, cybercriminals by night: how two professionals fell after using ransomware

The DGT is “favoring massive fraud” with the V-16 beacons. We don’t say it, FACUA denounces it

by

Of favoring “massive fraud” and “very serious passivity.” This is how Rubén Sánchez, spokesperson for the consumer association FACUA, has defined the attitude taken by the DGT on the occasion of the arrival of the V-16 beacons, which will be mandatory from January 1, 2026 to replace the emergency triangles. The association defends that many drivers have bought beacons that are now useless. But, in addition, the press conference and the company’s statement also leave another door open: who and why are criticizing or defending the measure? “A massive fraud”. The words are not found in the statement issued by FACUA but he does pick them up Europa Press from the mouth of Rubén Sánchez, spokesperson for the association, who has accused the DGT of favoring a “massive fraud” with its “very serious passivity” in the face of V-16 beacons that are sold as “approved by the DGT” but in reality are not legal. At the press conference, Sánchez has been much harsher with Traffic than the association has published on its website, ensuring that “it is silent while a multitude of companies, manufacturers and sales platforms are making money at the expense” of consumers” and that the DGT is doing it “absolutely badly because it has allowed large-scale commercial fraud.” Because? Because some of the V-16 beacons that are sold as “approved by the DGT” are not valid, according to FACUA. The association assures that there are companies using this claim to sell their beacons but these do not meet the connectivity requirements and, therefore, an agent can fine the user if they use it in their car. How is it possible? There are two options in this case. The first is that, directly, the company that is selling these beacons is engaging in fraud. That is, you are knowingly selling a product using a claim that is false. Therefore, the best we can do if we find a particularly cheap beacon is review on the DGT website that we are facing a device that complies with all of the law. The other possibility is that the shopping centers have taken out of storage the beacons that began to be sold before their connection with DGT 3.0 was mandatory. At that time, it made perfect sense that the box stated that they were “approved by the DGT” but obviously they have been out of date. FACUA denounces the following: “The obligation to inform the consumer about “the essential characteristics of the good” and to provide him with “relevant, truthful and sufficient information” about it is also being violated, as established in articles 20.1.b and 60.1 of Royal Legislative Decree 1/2007, of November 16, which approves the consolidated text of the General Law for the Defense of Consumers and Users and other complementary laws” Tepidity. FACUA’s words contrast with those of other consumer associations. The most obvious case is that of OCU, who have been opposed on some occasions to the measures taken by the DGT, such as environmental labelingbut they have not been dissatisfied with the V-16 beacons. The consumer association has made publications specifying what requirements are necessary to have a V-16 beacon connected or dismantling hoaxes. Posts that come with discounts on subscriptions that have a V-16 beacon attached as an ol giftdirect sale of this product. Beacons, beacons everywhere. And the V-16 beacon has become the star product of Christmas. All the large surfaces are promoting this product with supposed discounts, large online shopping spaces such as AliExpress or Temu They take discounts on the product to their highest point. The companies telephone They deliver it with new contracts, Mail has it in its offices and driver associations such as RACE either RACC They also have theirs. It is the result of a process that has allowed certify the same product with very subtle differences and then sold under different names. The most flagrant and controversial case of recent days is that of Angel Gaitan. He influencer has repeatedly criticized the imposition of this new device but has not lost the opportunity to sell a beacon under your seal which, in reality, is the same as that approved by the inventors of the new device and those who received the first approval from the DGT to sell their beacons presuming complete legality. Photo | Facua In Xataka | Yes, next year I am going to carry the V-16 beacon because they force me to. It doesn’t even occur to me to throw away the triangles

There are people listening to Drake on Spotify 23 hours a day. Or maybe they are not human and it is a ‘royalty’ fraud

by

That Spotify pays artists quite poorly It’s no secret, but now they are being accused of something else: there are artists inflating their reproductions in order to reduce the payment for the rest since the distribution is proportional. The demand. They count in Ars Technica which is a class action lawsuit proposed by American rapper RBX. In it, the platform is accused of having allowed Drake to inflate his views. Currently, the rapper holds the record on the platform with 120,000 million views. Although Drake is at the center of the lawsuit, he goes further and claims that Spotify ignores “millions of fraudulent streams.” The signs. According to RBX, Spotify ignored at least 37 billion inauthentic streams of Drake’s music over the past three and a half years. To do this, they have analyzed listening patterns and have detected strange behaviors such as “months of significant increases” without the release of new music to explain those peaks. But the most suspicious of all is that certain accounts only played Drake’s music for 23 hours a day, something they consider “astonishing and irregular” and why Spotify had detected it. The payment system. Spotify does not pay artists for each play, but instead uses a proportional model. Every month a “pool” of money is created and each artist receives a proportional share based on the reproductions they have had in that period. Thus, if one month the sum amounts to 1 million euros, an artist who has achieved 1% of the total reproductions would take home 10,000 euros. It affects everyone. With the proportional system, if one artist inflates his figures, it negatively affects all the other artists competing for a piece of the pie. Although they have not given details of how they arrived at that figure, the lawsuit speaks of “hundreds of millions of dollars.” If the judge accepts the case, it could cover more than 100,000 copyright owners who use the platform. It’s not something new. Years ago we talked about the techniques to manipulate the charts on the platform. The most famous case was that of Justin Bieber, who In 2020 he asked his followers to loop his song ‘Yummy’ to take it to number one on the charts. But the normal thing is that it is done undercover, using fake accounts hidden under a VPN that hides the real location. In statements to Rolling Stonea Spotify representative has denied benefiting from fake plays and claims to invest in systems to protect artists and eliminate fake plays. Image | Wikipedia, Pexels In Xataka | The problem is no longer that Spotify has been filled with AI artists: it is that AI is “reviving” dead musicians

Google is even the noses of the fraud by SMS and calls. Android’s new functions are going to hunt

by

Important day for Android and consumer technology. Google has made official some of the changes that will arrive with Android 16. Among them, Material 3 Expressivethe new design language that will land this 2025. In addition to changes in the interface, Google wanted to focus on security and privacy. To do this, it opens a good number of functions that will land in the coming months. Protection against fraudulent SMS. It is more than probable that, in recent months, you have arrived some SMS that promised to be from a telephone company, parcel company or the like. The detection of Scams in Google messages will improve with Android 16and Android will notify in real time of possible fraud. Within the messages itself, the system will notify us when a message is suspicious of fraud: identity supplant, scams related to cryptocurrencies, fraudulent billing … This analysis will be carried out in a 100% local way within the device, so that nothing that comes to us will be processed in the cloud. Also in calls. Google has been doing something very well for years: Filter suspicious spam calls. However, sometimes this is not enough to protect the user. With Android 16, there are certain actions that cannot be made during calls. The objective is to prevent scammers from asking the user to make behaviors that play against them (change security settings, modify some aspects of the system, etc.) during a call. In other words, Android will not only have protection against spam. He will also have it against the SCAM: the various scams that are so on digital roads. Key Verifier. Another of the new tools that lands in the new version of Android is Key Verifier. This is focused on combating fraud due to impersonation of identity, and will allow us to verify the identity of the people with whom we communicate through public encryption keys. Through a QR code it will be possible to verify that the contact is verified in the Google messages app, since its keys must coincide with those assigned. It is a great solution to the popular problem of Sim Swapping, in which they replace our identity by passing through our telephone number. This measure is not linked to Android 16. It will arrive from summer to all devices that have Android 10 or higher. Anti -theft protection. Google premiered interesting Anti -theft functions not too muchand now he wants to take a twist. Safety measures will be reinforced in sections such as the factory reset of a device. It will no longer suffice to know the mobile key, it will also be possible to add an additional layer through a security question. In the same way, this will apply to the remote device block, to minimize the possibility that an attacker can make changes to our mobile if he has had access to any of his keys. Find Hub. Do you remember Find My Device? Well, you can forget him. This Google service evolves to Find Hub, the natural evolution of the app to track our devices. With Find Hub we will have more unified locations not only of objects, but of the contacts that we add to our network, as well as the objects that carry tracking devices such as Tile, Moto Tag and others. Security protection. To finish strengthening system safety, the device protection function arrives. This is a function in which the apps will be informed that it is active, to avoid the temptation to access our information. What exactly do you? While active, anti -theft functions, memory optimizations and applications against possible bugs and errors that can be exploited, network connection protection to avoid insecure websites, and the aforementioned messaging and SCAM options will always be operational. With these fu Image | Google In Xataka | Android anti -theft protection: What is it, what functions it has and how to activate it on your mobile

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.