121–128 of 128 posts
At some point Captcha's will be easier to solve with software than by people. Hopefully by then we can retire them completely. The onus for proving that a visitor is not a bot should be on the server side, not on the humans.
> The onus for proving that a visitor is not a bot should be on the server side, Unfortunately that's exactly what is happening with ReCaptcha checking for Google cookies.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you want my business? I have gone elsewhere with my money instead of solving for crosswalks before
And that works very well for every website you pay to use. What percentage of websites that you use is that, exactly?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
isnt it ultimately just a series of API calls to solve the captchas? whats to stop someone hooking the javascript, solving the images and then raising the right event ?
I would assume Google would send all mouse events to the server, then compare them with all other mouse events from all users who solve reCaptchas and then decide on a "humanness rating" of the data internally and use that alongside all other parameters to decide the probability the user is or is not a bot. You can't fake that, you can send fake events but you can't trick Google for long enough, sooner or later it wo…
But what if the device is mobile or tablet (or touch screen laptop) where captchas are solved without mouse movement? I guess that could be the reason why Google has not implemented it yet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The onus for proving that a visitor is not a bot should be on the server side, Unfortunately that's exactly what is happening with ReCaptcha checking for Google cookies.
I'm not sure I follow. Cookies are stored in the client.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would assume Google would send all mouse events to the server, then compare them with all other mouse events from all users who solve reCaptchas and then decide on a "humanness rating" of the data internally and use that alongside all other parameters to decide the probability the user is or is not a bot. You can't fake that, you can send fake events but you can't trick Google for long enough, sooner or later it wo…
probably Google is already working on it. But what if the device is mobile or tablet (or touch screen laptop) where captchas are solved without mouse movement? I guess that could be the reason why Google has not implemented it yet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Audio and video evidence isn't admissible because it's audio or video (and may be inadmissible nonetheless). It's admissible because someone testifies under oath that they have personal knowledge of its provenance. The burden is on the party introducing the evidence to show that it's reliable, and the question of whether or not it is indeed reliable is a factual one for a judge or jury to answer. It's not assumed to…
It will be inadmissable because of the psychological effects. Imagine having someone claim you murdered someone. Also you happened to drive by that park where the person was murdered at the same time. Now someone wants to frame you, perhaps because you are a celebrity or a person with money to extort from. So they claim that they saw you murder this person. Normally, this wouldn't hold any water and no jury would con…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And that works very well for every website you pay to use. What percentage of websites that you use is that, exactly?
I booked a hotel room elsewhere just this weekend.
That's fair. I think your solution would work for those.