271–280 of 442 posts
This is the sort of problem that genetic algorithms are well suited for (a small, well defined input domain with a binary oracle). You'd simply generate a random path, run a smoothing function over it, see if that works, then iterate.
edit: does anyone know a site that is actually using this new widget? I only seem to be finding the older version... :/
"If we can collect behavioural data from you, and it matches closely the behaviour of other humans, you are a human. Otherwise you're not a human." Does anyone else get that feeling from the description of what Google is doing? I've tripped their "we think you are a bot" detection filter and been presented with a captcha countless times while using complex search queries and searching for relatively obscure things, a…
(Disclaimer: I work at Google, but not on ReCaptcha.) The point of this change is to make things easier on 90% of humans -- the ones who have JavaScript and third-party cookies enabled now get to tick a checkbox and be on their merry way, instead of doing a useless captcha when we knew they were already humans. Recall that when ReCaptcha initially came out, the argument was "humans are wasting all of this time, let's…
Google Brigade to the rescue again.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> and it's frankly very insulting and rather disturbing that they think someone who inputs "unusual" search queries, according to their measure, is not human. Insulting? how is that insulting? You are entitled. You are entitled you block scripts, use Google's FREE service to perform any search query to search the web while blocking any program that attempts to identify you as not a bot. But if while using their free…
You'd have a point except for the fact that recaptchas have become increasingly impossible to solve (for humans!). And recaptchas aren't just on google sites, they're everywhere.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually it would be great is someone has some ideas for ways to identify humans that don't require stuff like javascript. From the perspective of a service provider (and I'm one) the bots are a scourge, they consume resources and they are clearly attempting to 'mine' the search engine for something, but they are unwilling to come forward and just ask the search provider if they would sell it to them. And since they…
Isn't this just the cost of having a "free" product? Bots are not really a problem. Its just that their traffic cannot be monetized. If you could monetize-bot traffic your problem would be solved. Or put another way, if you framed the issue as a business model one, not a technical one, it might be a useful exercise.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> and it's frankly very insulting and rather disturbing that they think someone who inputs "unusual" search queries, according to their measure, is not human. Insulting? how is that insulting? You are entitled. You are entitled you block scripts, use Google's FREE service to perform any search query to search the web while blocking any program that attempts to identify you as not a bot. But if while using their free…
You are entitled. Has calling someone entitled ever been useful? For the last few years it's felt like nothing more than a petty "you're wrong" remark with bonus condensation built right in.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am visually impaired and can attest to both visual captchas being a pain and audio captchas being hard to understand. this change is nothing but an improvement as far as accessibility and usability goes. This is only a plus for people who implement these, as I have actually left sites that had insurmountable captchas for me. Thank you.
Check out webvisum.com - from their website: "WebVisum is a unique browser add on which greatly enhances web accessibility and empowers the blind and visually impaired community by putting the control in your hands!" "Automated and instant CAPTCHA image solving, sign up to web sites and make forum posts and blog comments without asking for help!"
How do they do that? This sounds like whitehat use of blackhat tools. Are they using captcha-solving farms?
"If we can collect behavioural data from you, and it matches closely the behaviour of other humans, you are a human. Otherwise you're not a human." Does anyone else get that feeling from the description of what Google is doing? I've tripped their "we think you are a bot" detection filter and been presented with a captcha countless times while using complex search queries and searching for relatively obscure things, a…
I don't understand how this can't be spoofed. I can only see how it'll slow a bot down, and maybe reduce the number of accounts it can create/commandeer.