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

141–150 of 245 posts

Re: Introducing the Invisible reCAPTCHA

#141

Post by jlebrech »

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.

at least it's better than a CIACaptcha "please click on the terrorist on this photo"

Re: Introducing the Invisible reCAPTCHA

#142

Post by kalleboo »

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.

4chan used to have a campaign where they'd collectively replace the obviously-unknown word in the ReCaptcha text captchas with the n-word to poison the results...

Re: Introducing the Invisible reCAPTCHA

#143

Post by mrighele »

danso wrote: post #124
mrighele wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is "free work" since I'm helping training Google's algorithms and I don't get money back. Note that the service is free for the site owner, but not for the end user, which has to invest his/her own time.

A site uses captcha because it is threatened by automated use. A site uses Google's CAPTCHA because the site cannot afford to build a (effective) CAPTCHA. If Google required the site to pay to use their CAPTCHA, those costs would be passed in some way to the user. In other words, if Google's service didn't exist, you'd be experiencing less of the site, or no site at all if they chose to use a paywall that you refuse…

I am not saying that the service is not useful. It certainly is . What I am arguing is that it requires the users to do some amount of work and so it is not free for them, and I am of the opinion that Google benefit from it much more than I do.

Anyway, I am not completely against it, as I said above depending on the situation I make use of it.

Re: Introducing the Invisible reCAPTCHA

#144

Post by yjftsjthsd-h »

arjie wrote: post #131
m_t wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A generic captcha doesn't use the work done by the user. I'm not the person you're replying to, but I think I can guess what could be their answer.

What would it be? It's not clear to me. Going from throwing away the work to improving Google's image recognition is a Pareto improvement so I'm interested in the justification.

Not everyone is using the same ethical model as you?

Re: Introducing the Invisible reCAPTCHA

#145

Post by eriknstr »

danso wrote: post #134
dsp1234 wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is that "free work"? The original recaptcha was used to help clear up text from book digitization projects where OCR couldn't understand the data. The appeal of this was that these works were in the public domain, and thus proper digitization of these works is a societal-wide benefit. Since Google purchased it, they've been using it to: 1.) Clean street view data for a proprietary product (Google maps) 2.) Build…

Recaptcha was not a free service. Or if it was, why did Google end up paying millions for it? And it's not free now, unless the engineers and scientists working on it are working pro bono. According to Wikipedia and the New York Times, reCaptcha was not developed for public domain works. Its pilot project was to digitize the NYT archives, archives which were not released to the public domain nor are fully available w…

I had totally forgotten how bad the word mush was. In perspective of this, I agree that we do get something back from doing unpaid work for Google, and that is a HUGELY improved user experience with the current reCAPTCHA like "click all the pictures of sandwiches" or "click the portions of the picture that has a street sign in it" compared to the earlier reCAPTCHA and other CAPTCHA.

Re: Introducing the Invisible reCAPTCHA

#146

Post by mmcwilliams »

zumu wrote: post #42

I always wondered how blind people entered captchas. Does this finally make captchas accessible?

I'm less aware of how the more modern captchas work under the hood, but I do know that the audio interface (provided for for accessibility) of an older version of captcha was used as an attack vector for defeating it. My understanding is that the optional audio file was run through an STT program to generate the answer text so that requests could still be automated. Translating speech to text is less computationally expensive than OCR, especially when captchas were typically using hard to read or intentionally distorted images of text.

Someone who knows more about this than me can certainly school me on that last bit, however.

Re: Introducing the Invisible reCAPTCHA

#147

Post by yjftsjthsd-h »

Filligree wrote: post #138
Ntrails wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 .

Imagine, if you will, a scene like this. It is dusk. You are out running in the park, trying to get exercise before the last light fades. Suddenly you realize: A group of people have been closing on you, boxing you in from all sides. You try to run. Your muscles burn, you heave for breath. They match your pace exactly, coming closer... and closer... and closer. You cast your gaze desperately from side to side. Isn't…

Having backups is important. Not needing to use them, however, is still a very good thing.

Re: Introducing the Invisible reCAPTCHA

#148

Post by quickben »

michaelt wrote: post #133
arjie wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Imagine you're at an airport and an inspector takes your batteries out of your luggage. All other things being equal, does it matter if he tosses them in the trash, or keeps them for his personal use? From one perspective it doesn't matter - your batteries are gone either way. But from another perspective, inspectors who keep what they find have completely different motivations - making the same outcome much more sin…

For a more accurate money analogy: Imagine he resells them.

Re: Introducing the Invisible reCAPTCHA

#149

Post by akerro »

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.

Not sure if that's good for us. We're doing work for google for free. Google Translate will replace translators,

Google car will replace drivers, Google VR + map will replace city guides. We're giving them knowledge and powers to replace us, for free. Professions will disappear, people will lose jobs, Google will get richer and richer, will not pay me or you for fixing their suggestions in Google Translate or fixing maps or improving computed route from A to B.

No one is being paid for that work, but someone is monetizing it.

Re: Introducing the Invisible reCAPTCHA

#150

Post by quickben »

patrickaljord wrote: post #125
stephenr wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

What's wrong with them building a profile of me as long as I consented to it? Are you opposed to consenting agreements between willing adults and companies?

Because, in 5 , 10, or 200 years. When societies (or rules) change, it will be used to discriminate or worse.

"Whoever doesn't study history is doomed to repeat it.'

Post reply on HN