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

An Empirical Study and Evaluation of Modern CAPTCHAs

arxiv.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 338 posts

Re: An Empirical Study and Evaluation of Modern CAPTCHAs

#291

Post by idiotsecant »

dgellow wrote: post #276
malfist wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, it's cost prohibitive now. But what about in five years? Or probably even less.

Then you have a new type of captcha. That has always been a cat and mouse type of dynamics, captchas have been evolving, techniques to break them too.

>Then you have a new type of captcha.

You're in a desert, walking along when you look down and see a tortoise. It's crawling toward you. You reach down and flip it over on its back, its belly baking in the hot sun, beating its legs trying to turn itself over. But it can't. Not with out your help. But you're not helping. Why is that?

Re: An Empirical Study and Evaluation of Modern CAPTCHAs

#292

Post by armada651 »

graphe wrote: post #262
saberience wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For those with elderly parents the writing has been on the wall for years. It’s sad but my mother has for some time been effectively locked out of parts of the internet as she is unable to complete these kinds of captures due to eyesight issues. I mean, I’ve sometimes had to try three or four times with certain captures and I have perfect eyesight (with my glasses). I feel so badly for those with vision or hearing is…

There's audio captcha. Try to click the headphone logo (Google captcha has it).

Because as we all know, the elderly with deteriorating eye sight have perfect hearing. /s

Re: An Empirical Study and Evaluation of Modern CAPTCHAs

#293

Post by notnullorvoid »

tim333 wrote: post #268

Coincidentally Worldcoin is up 30% today. Maybe cryptographic/biometric proof of being a human will be useful after all?

No thanks, I'd rather not live in a dystopian nightmare where Sam Altman is in control of assigning proof of humanity. Worldcoin will undoubtedly end up assigning identities to AIs for profit anyway, and/or there will be swaths of identities being sold on the black market.

Re: An Empirical Study and Evaluation of Modern CAPTCHAs

#294

Post by bheadmaster »

diputsmonro wrote: post #82
bheadmaster wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla recalled two million vehicles after federal officials said it had not done enough to make sure that drivers remained attentive when using the system. Not because their self-driving system sucks, or whatever you were trying to imply.

If the self driving system were worth it's salt, it wouldn't matter if the drivers weren't paying attention. Ergo, the system sucks, or is at the very least not nearly as good as Tesla likes to tout.

Doesn't matter, the original point was about Google not being able to build a better self-driving system than Tesla, despite abundance of data, which is true, as far as I'm informed. Whether or not Tesla's self-driving system is "good enough" (for any chosen metric) is beyond the point.

But I guess people these days just love to jump on the opportunity to hate whatever is trendy to hate at the moment.

Re: An Empirical Study and Evaluation of Modern CAPTCHAs

#295

Post by tim333 »

McDyver wrote: post #201
jhrmnn wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This just made me ponder again—where does the assumption that the Internet should allow unconstrained anonymity come from, other than that’s how it used to be for some time? The real world doesn’t allow that. It’s hard to remain anonymous in the real world. The real world largely runs on identity and (identity) trust. Why should the Internet be different?

I believe that the question should be the other way around: Why is it that you have to lose your anonimity when you are on the internet? The real world always allowed that until it became dependent on surveillance capitalism. Of course you need to prove you're yourself for some things, but that should be the exception. You could always look things up at your local library while being anonymous (for checking out you'd…

In the real world people can see who's doing what by looking.

Re: An Empirical Study and Evaluation of Modern CAPTCHAs

#296

Post by nicbou »

joseda-hg wrote: post #253
anonzzzies wrote: post #14

I guess validating a payment card is going to be the next step to sign up for whatever. Don’t allow pre paid BINs and let’s go. Gonna be pretty miserable, however someone needs to find something as I currently would rather pay 0.01$ instead of solving a captcha. Especially the select all the bicycles; it’s a waste of life.

I dread to think about that becoming the norm, I remember living in {Country} with 0 access to cards that would be accepted for anything international

I help people settle in Germany and it's a serious problem. The requirements to open an account disqualify many immigrants. It creates a lot of problems.

Re: An Empirical Study and Evaluation of Modern CAPTCHAs

#297

Post by abacadaba »

pyeri wrote: post #86
caymanjim wrote: post #42

Google CAPTCHAs were designed and deployed as a mechanism to train AIs. That's why they are the way they are. Any security theater surrounding them is entirely incidental. So it's no surprise that the AIs are now good at solving them. We've trained them for years.

Once they get fully trained then how will websites ever distinguish between an intelligent bot and real human? At least now, they are outsourcing that filtering to services like cloudflare. But with this kind of training, how will even cloudflare distinguish between bot and the human?

With Ethereum Attestation Service

https://attest.sh/

Re: An Empirical Study and Evaluation of Modern CAPTCHAs

#299

Post by eesmith »

maccard wrote: post #140
pigeonhole123 wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't have to show my ID in most establishments I visit. Doing this on a huge scale and automatically is a thousand times worse.

But you can't send in 1000 people per second into most establishments you visit either. It's not an apt comparison.

What does the number/second have to do with 'It’s hard to remain anonymous in the real world. The real world largely runs on identity and (identity) trust.'?

There are very few places in the real world which can handl 1,000 people per second.

In the real world I rarely need to identify myself. I can see a movie, visit the library, buy groceries, go to a restaurant, and more.

Re: An Empirical Study and Evaluation of Modern CAPTCHAs

#300

Post by fnordpiglet »

behringer wrote: post #275
pixl97 wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>captures due to eyesight issues. I'm kinda surprised that ADA doesn't allow them to sue site owners about this.

They almost certainly do. However most captchas allow an alternative solving method. On top of that, you'd have to find a lawyer willing to take the case.

Oh ADA lawyers are a dime a dozen. There’s entire cottage industries of finding ADA violations to sue over. The issue is more finding companies to sue that can’t afford to fight back.
Post reply on HN