21–30 of 54 posts
Really, pretty much every CAPTCHA has been solved with deep learning now. The mitigations this guy gives can be trivially overcome.
What a game like Trivia HQ does is give a monetary incentive to build better trivia AI. Hi Watson!
"Trivia bots and clever hackers will be no issue for the platform’s rapid growth, as long as HQ makes a few critical adjustments." Really, pretty much every CAPTCHA has been solved with deep learning now. The mitigations this guy gives can be trivially overcome. What a game like Trivia HQ does is give a monetary incentive to build better trivia AI. Hi Watson!
To promote their currency, they had a variety of games you could play to earn small amounts of currency. One was a trivia game. My friends and I wrote a perl script to play the game, guess an answer, and whenever it guessed right, remember that combination for next time.
We ran the bot 24/7. The real coup was throttling the bot so we were never the top earner in any day; we aimed to be approximately in tenth place every day. That managed to keep our gains plausible.
As the dotcom bubble exploded, there was less and less you could do with iDollars. Eventually someone at iDollar caught on and we eventually got a cease-and-desist letter telling us to stop, although the let us keep our spoils. My one friend managed to trade in his remaining iDollars for like 250 iDollar promotional golf towels, right before the company went under for good. I wonder if he still has them.
This article practically rips off my article as well as an article I cited in that post, which I submitted earlier this week. If you put both articles side-by-side, they have the same structure and a fairly similar approach to the problem. While this could be a coincidence (and honestly, I don’t care), I’m still a little miffed that the author didn’t bother to cite his inspiration. The post in question: https://apple…
This article practically rips off my article as well as an article I cited in that post, which I submitted earlier this week. If you put both articles side-by-side, they have the same structure and a fairly similar approach to the problem. While this could be a coincidence (and honestly, I don’t care), I’m still a little miffed that the author didn’t bother to cite his inspiration. The post in question: https://apple…
You should’ve put HQ Trivia in the post name. Pretty sure that’s why this got more attention.
This article practically rips off my article as well as an article I cited in that post, which I submitted earlier this week. If you put both articles side-by-side, they have the same structure and a fairly similar approach to the problem. While this could be a coincidence (and honestly, I don’t care), I’m still a little miffed that the author didn’t bother to cite his inspiration. The post in question: https://apple…
You should’ve put HQ Trivia in the post name. Pretty sure that’s why this got more attention.
This article practically rips off my article as well as an article I cited in that post, which I submitted earlier this week. If you put both articles side-by-side, they have the same structure and a fairly similar approach to the problem. While this could be a coincidence (and honestly, I don’t care), I’m still a little miffed that the author didn’t bother to cite his inspiration. The post in question: https://apple…
This article practically rips off my article as well as an article I cited in that post, which I submitted earlier this week. If you put both articles side-by-side, they have the same structure and a fairly similar approach to the problem. While this could be a coincidence (and honestly, I don’t care), I’m still a little miffed that the author didn’t bother to cite his inspiration. The post in question: https://apple…
Yours is better IMO. Also, you showed an actual demo and very thorough explanation of your approach.
I was also considering using the chat messages to get the answer. People are either going to mostly say the right answer to sound smart or mostly send the wrong answers to try to trick people. Keep track of which is most common and you have an additional datapoint.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yours is better IMO. Also, you showed an actual demo and very thorough explanation of your approach.
Thank you! It's a pleasure to share my ideas with a community like this.