Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Introducing the Invisible reCAPTCHA

google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 245 posts

Re: Introducing the Invisible reCAPTCHA

#91

Post by stephenr »

jhall1468 wrote: post #89
stephenr wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did I claim to be using their services? Stick to what you know if you don't like reading what I actually write. I was questioning someone feeling "hypocritical" for using other google services but disliking their new recaptcha tool. As for "the contract": I'd wager that for most people, most contracts they see/sign are easier to get a clear understanding of, than Google's business model of "free" services.

> As for "the contract": I'd wager that for most people, most contracts they see/sign are easier to get a clear understanding of, than Google's business model of "free" services Oh bull shit. The contracts you sign (or click I agree to) are thousands of legal definitions and words that most people don't even read, much less understand. Google's contract is very simple: We show you ads (the more we understand your int…

> We show you ads (the more we understand your interests, the more targeted our ads) and you get to use our stuff without monetary cost.

And where do they spell that out?

Re: Introducing the Invisible reCAPTCHA

#92

Post by icebraining »

jhall1468 wrote: post #89
stephenr wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did I claim to be using their services? Stick to what you know if you don't like reading what I actually write. I was questioning someone feeling "hypocritical" for using other google services but disliking their new recaptcha tool. As for "the contract": I'd wager that for most people, most contracts they see/sign are easier to get a clear understanding of, than Google's business model of "free" services.

> As for "the contract": I'd wager that for most people, most contracts they see/sign are easier to get a clear understanding of, than Google's business model of "free" services Oh bull shit. The contracts you sign (or click I agree to) are thousands of legal definitions and words that most people don't even read, much less understand. Google's contract is very simple: We show you ads (the more we understand your int…

Have you tried asking your non-IT acquaintances whether they knew and understood the tracking part? Because my experience is that most people don't, even if you think it should be obvious.

Re: Introducing the Invisible reCAPTCHA

#93

Post by icebraining »

gingerbread-man wrote: post #74
stephenr wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is the method of building the "profile" that determines what's "relevant" for you.

Google lets you turn off "personalized ads" if you don't want them. https://support.google.com/ads/answer/2662922?hl=en

That only lets you stop seeing the personalized ads. It doesn't say it stops tracking you.

Re: Introducing the Invisible reCAPTCHA

#94

Post by danso »

mrighele wrote: post #22
macrael wrote: post #4

Google using captchas to get humans to read street addresses captured by street view cars to improve maps results remains one of the most Googly things they've ever done. Genius, lateral, and a little weird.

Having to do free work for Google is more than weird for me. For this reason unless the page is really important I end up closing the tab. If it was for open service (such as OpenStreetMap) it would be a different matter though.

How is that "free work"? Automated usage can threaten a site's bottom-line, and even its existence. A site resorts to Google's CAPTCHA's service because they don't have the money to build their own detector. It's not a service that was free for Google to create.

edit: Also worth noting that some of this "free work" that users do for Google is used to improve bot-detection overall. The comment to this blog post (the post itself, and its paper are great reads) is a nice example:

https://security.googleblog.com/2013/10/recaptcha-just-got-e...

Essentially, the user is complaining (and justifiably so) of being served the pre-Street-View versions of CAPTCHA; I had forgotten how bad they could get: http://i.imgur.com/01F2eES.png

Re: Introducing the Invisible reCAPTCHA

#95

Post by arjie »

goodplay wrote: post #82
mrighele wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having to do free work for Google is more than weird for me. For this reason unless the page is really important I end up closing the tab. If it was for open service (such as OpenStreetMap) it would be a different matter though.

I actually feed google false information (select rectangular objects when asked to select traffic signs, flat surfaces when asked for water surfaces, and so on). It'll probably be filtered out when aggregated with other users, but I like to think that I'm at least influencing it even if a little. I wouldn't have a problem if they'd open the data set, but I'm not exactly keen on being forced to work for free.

So you'd do the work if it were not productive but not otherwise? Like, if they just threw away your input into the CAPTCHA after confirming you're human, you're okay with that? Or do you just hate CAPTCHAs on principle?

Re: Introducing the Invisible reCAPTCHA

#96

Post by danso »

retrogradeorbit wrote: post #34
daviding wrote: post #3

It's done by binding it to one of your own buttons, where I guess it does the 'jitter test' on that element (if it's a low risk IP). https://developers.google.com/recaptcha/docs/invisible

What is "the jitter test"?

If you asking for a demo of it in action:

https://www.google.com/recaptcha/api2/demo

Re: Introducing the Invisible reCAPTCHA

#97

Post by gnarbarian »

arjie wrote: post #95
goodplay wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually feed google false information (select rectangular objects when asked to select traffic signs, flat surfaces when asked for water surfaces, and so on). It'll probably be filtered out when aggregated with other users, but I like to think that I'm at least influencing it even if a little. I wouldn't have a problem if they'd open the data set, but I'm not exactly keen on being forced to work for free.

So you'd do the work if it were not productive but not otherwise? Like, if they just threw away your input into the CAPTCHA after confirming you're human, you're okay with that? Or do you just hate CAPTCHAs on principle?

this comes to mind:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gd7fE9_7_7A

Re: Introducing the Invisible reCAPTCHA

#98

Post by kasperni »

goodplay wrote: post #82
mrighele wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having to do free work for Google is more than weird for me. For this reason unless the page is really important I end up closing the tab. If it was for open service (such as OpenStreetMap) it would be a different matter though.

I actually feed google false information (select rectangular objects when asked to select traffic signs, flat surfaces when asked for water surfaces, and so on). It'll probably be filtered out when aggregated with other users, but I like to think that I'm at least influencing it even if a little. I wouldn't have a problem if they'd open the data set, but I'm not exactly keen on being forced to work for free.

But you use their service for free, right?

Re: Introducing the Invisible reCAPTCHA

#99

Post by Ntrails »

bitmapbrother wrote: post #76
icebraining wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the point is that they're payment enough, no need to feel hypocritical for disliking the captcha.

People that project their paranoia on others are usually running ad, tracking and probably even script blockers.

I do that not because I want to not be tracked, but because I am bad at computers and don't want to accidentally install a virus because blatting and starting again would be an bunch of effort and it's not like my stuff is backed up or anything.

Sometimes though I wonder if I shouldn't turn adblock off, for example, and then I'm at work and some website auto-plays video and I remember.

Re: Introducing the Invisible reCAPTCHA

#100

Post by mirimir »

piyush_soni wrote: post #83
tonyedgecombe wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It modifies your behaviour in ways that aren't in your interest.

And how's that different than advertisements in News Papers/magazines and TV? People never seemed to have a problem with that, and no one ever said "you are the product". Somehow, that is associated mostly only with Google.

Fast-forwarding through ads has been an extremely popular feature for VCRs.
Post reply on HN