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

Google’s new reCAPTCHA has a dark side

fastcompany.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 566 posts

Re: Google’s new reCAPTCHA has a dark side

#341

Post by davidgerard »

benreesman wrote: post #314
__jal wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It’s nonetheless a shame that it’s so universally misunderstood how ad-supported megacorps make their money that even highly sophisticated users of the web still talk about the value of personal data (source: I ran Facebook’s ads backend for years). That may be the case for some people, but that is not my complaint, nor that of many folks I know. I simply don't care how FB, Google and other surveillance outfits mak…

You could either stop using these services or (as I suspect) you find them too valuable to dismiss entirely quarantine them to a VPN/incognito interaction in less time than it took to type that comment. I don’t want to single you out personally but there’s a broad trend on HN of bitter-sounding commentary on the surveillance powers of these companies by people who can easily defeat any tracking that it’s economical f…

> sour grapes

seriously?

Re: Google’s new reCAPTCHA has a dark side

#342

Post by pessimizer »

nullc wrote: post #211
seieste wrote: post #74

There are government services, such as the USPTO, that rely on Google reCAPTCHA. The new reCAPTCHA has made it difficult for me to access documents, and sometimes they think that I'm a bot and thus deny me access entirely. Does the government realize the consequences of this? Both that it pushes users to use Chromium-based browsers, and that they're helping to solidify a company that already has a near monopoly in th…

I was amused that Elizabeth Warren's campaign site wouldn't display the content for me unless I permitted scripts from google.com (w/ umatrix) since she is promoting breaking up google.

It's typical of politicians not to run their own organizations in the same way as they say the world should be run; campaign organizations are a bit fly-by-night, and political platforms are more or less flexible by necessity.

I think it comes from the sad fact that, generally, ambitious politicians create organizations to get themselves elected, rather than previously-existing and purposeful organizations presenting candidates that represent that organization's values to a larger audience.

Re: Google’s new reCAPTCHA has a dark side

#343

Post by amirhirsch »

peterangular wrote: post #304
amirhirsch wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

thanks, I work on hCaptcha, we are hoping to provide a unbiased bot-detection system with different incentives from an advertising company. Let me know if you have any questions.

Have any services like AC or 2captcha integrated against you?

we've seen people asking them to integrate us on social media. you should see my comment about epidemic analysis above.

Re: Google’s new reCAPTCHA has a dark side

#344

Post by 13415 »

benreesman wrote: post #314
__jal wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It’s nonetheless a shame that it’s so universally misunderstood how ad-supported megacorps make their money that even highly sophisticated users of the web still talk about the value of personal data (source: I ran Facebook’s ads backend for years). That may be the case for some people, but that is not my complaint, nor that of many folks I know. I simply don't care how FB, Google and other surveillance outfits mak…

You could either stop using these services or (as I suspect) you find them too valuable to dismiss entirely quarantine them to a VPN/incognito interaction in less time than it took to type that comment. I don’t want to single you out personally but there’s a broad trend on HN of bitter-sounding commentary on the surveillance powers of these companies by people who can easily defeat any tracking that it’s economical f…

A VPN will not help you against advanced behavioral browser fingerprinting like in this new Captcha. Not only do they have lists of VPN servers anyway, if you inadvertently log into your Google account once from the VPN (e.g. by launching your browser from your normal account), then the VPN IP(s) will be forever associated with your account and normal IPs, and they already know from the Captcha data that you're one and the same person. All the VPN does is adding the information that you sometimes use VPN servers of company such-and-such.

Re: Google’s new reCAPTCHA has a dark side

#345

Post by dessant »

benreesman wrote: post #223
dessant wrote: post #126

Google has been doing the same with reCAPTCHA v2 [1]. They are aware of the legal risk of outright blocking users from accessing services, so reCAPTCHA v3 contains no user facing UI, Google merely makes a suggestion in the form of a user score, so the responsibility to delay or block access and the legal liability that comes with it falls on websites. reCAPTCHA v2 is superseded by v3 because it presents a broader opp…

Your comment adds a lot to the conversation, so I don’t want to be more contrary than necessary. It’s nonetheless a shame that it’s so universally misunderstood how ad-supported megacorps make their money that even highly sophisticated users of the web still talk about the value of personal data (source: I ran Facebook’s ads backend for years). Much like the highest information-gain feature for the future price of a…

No offence, but your posts in this thread appear to be projections, and they derail the conversation.

The main topic we discuss is corporate surveillance. We are concerned about all the personal data that leaves our control. We are worried that evading this type of surveillance becomes increasingly difficult.

Some HN users may know how to mitigate these risks, but most people may not know how to defend themselves against corporate surveillance.

This is why me must speak up now, and not just for ourselves.

Re: Google’s new reCAPTCHA has a dark side

#346

Post by stOneskull »

benreesman wrote: post #331
bad_user wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about our friends and family? Should we configure a VPN for them too? Btw the argument you just made applies to any form of surveillance or censorship. Just because your can still find functional VPN services for China, is China's great firewall OK? And what happens when web services start blocking VPNs? Netflix does it quite successfully. And I'm sure Cloudflare could provide such a service for free.

I’m not making a moral argument for the surveillance state, I wear Curve25519 on one arm and the word “citizenfour” on the other. I agree that there is a vast and almost impossible to regulate overreach by these companies. Your argument is extremely compelling. But when HN users complain about being spied on I smell a FAANG rejection letter.

People care about others, not just themselves.

Re: Google’s new reCAPTCHA has a dark side

#347

Post by Freak_NL »

amenod wrote: post #327
benreesman wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could either stop using these services or (as I suspect) you find them too valuable to dismiss entirely quarantine them to a VPN/incognito interaction in less time than it took to type that comment. I don’t want to single you out personally but there’s a broad trend on HN of bitter-sounding commentary on the surveillance powers of these companies by people who can easily defeat any tracking that it’s economical f…

> You could either stop using these services or ... Are you serious? Have you tried not using their services? Try blocking Google Analytics, Tag Manager, ReCaptcha, fonts, gstatic,... What you will see is that you can no longer access much of the Internet. Want to participate in StackOverflow? Good luck if you block Google. My beef is not with them trying to find my data when I'm on their site(s). They are however ev…

> Try blocking Google Analytics, Tag Manager

Blocking those two doesn't seem to break much, does it? I have uBlock Origin and/or Privacy Badger block them everywhere.

ReCaptcha on the other hand…

Just this week I needed it to complete the booking of an airline ticket and just now buying a high chair for my son. And today I've completed the blasted thing ten times in a row because of a game installer that was failing at a certain point (GTA V's Social Club thing); each attempt to figure out what was wrong meant completing the ReCaptcha again.

Fire hydrants, parking metres, pedestrian crossings, road signs, hills, chimneys, steps, cyclists, buses — that's what the internet looks like in 2019.

Re: Google’s new reCAPTCHA has a dark side

#348

Post by judge2020 »

bscphil wrote: post #311
dessant wrote: post #126

Google has been doing the same with reCAPTCHA v2 [1]. They are aware of the legal risk of outright blocking users from accessing services, so reCAPTCHA v3 contains no user facing UI, Google merely makes a suggestion in the form of a user score, so the responsibility to delay or block access and the legal liability that comes with it falls on websites. reCAPTCHA v2 is superseded by v3 because it presents a broader opp…

> Since reCAPTCHA v3 scripts must be loaded on every page of a site, you must send Google your browsing history and detailed data about how you interact with sites in order to access basic services on the internet, such as paying your bills, or accessing healthcare services. > If you'll refuse to transmit personal data to Google, websites will hinder or block your access. I wonder how true this really is. 20% or so o…

Even UBO doesn't block ReCaptcha by default, so I don't see Rv3 being added to easylist anytime soon.

Re: Google’s new reCAPTCHA has a dark side

#349

Post by benreesman »

heartbreak wrote: post #337
benreesman wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could either stop using these services or (as I suspect) you find them too valuable to dismiss entirely quarantine them to a VPN/incognito interaction in less time than it took to type that comment. I don’t want to single you out personally but there’s a broad trend on HN of bitter-sounding commentary on the surveillance powers of these companies by people who can easily defeat any tracking that it’s economical f…

This is a ridiculous argument. Advanced technical competency can not be a prerequisite for maintaining personal privacy.

We’re on a site premised on entrepreneurship, and you’re pointing out what sounds like a big market gap. I angel invest now and then, if you have a plausible way to make two billion people care about something that we agree could be better my email is in my profile.

Even from the inside I didn’t see a way, but I’ve been wrong before.

Post reply on HN