5 ms·

Interesting idea but disappointing that the versions on the websites are just gif images, not actual demos we can test. [Probably just as well, as I can only s

Interesting idea but disappointing that the versions on the websites are just gif images, not actual demos we can test. [Probably just as well, as I can only solve the 'mate in one' puzzle, in two!]

HenryBemis 6y ago
Intersting idea yes, and I will make sure I will never go back to that website. Identifying fire hydrants or bicycles is annoying enough, but it takes 3-4 seconds. Setting up a chess board for 10 seconds? No thank you. If it is a service I use I will only write them once to complain, and if that doesn't go away I will drop them off (aka stop paying them)(and make sure they know why). Security and Convenience are (most times) opposites. I don't want to spend 10-20secs to log in to a site. Especially if I am paying them.
- rozab 6y ago
  When have you ever filled in a captcha for a paid service?
  - bluGill 6y ago
    Hilton honors requires it to book a room with points. I finally called and spoke with a person, my privacy settings mean I rarely pass, and those are set that way for a reason.
  - HenryBemis 6y ago
    Spotify, Dropbox, Carbonite are three that come to mind right now. The login screen doesn't know I got a paying account until after I have logged in.
- Normille 6y ago
  > Identifying fire hydrants or bicycles is annoying enough, but it takes 3-4 seconds. Setting up a chess board for 10 seconds? No thank you. I'd actually prefer something like the chess puzzle to the normal reCaptchas. I find those so annoying that, unless I really need to access the site in question, I'll just close the page as soon as I see one. [Are you listening webmasters!] Mind you, I'm impressed you can solve a reCaptcha in "3-4 seconds". They usually take me a hell of a lot longer than that because: 1: It's never made clear exactly what you're supposed to click on. For example. If I'm told to click on "traffic lights" does that mean just the lights?... or the poles as well?... and what about a square that only has a tiny bit in it? Does that count too, or is it only squares which are mostly filled by the object in question? 2: They make no concession to non-US English speakers. I've been asked to identify things before, where I had to guess what the word means because the same thing is called something completely different in UK English. The only thing that approaches the level of rage that reCaptchas instil in me are those captchas where you've got to transcribe what's in a photo of some letters & numbers and where they NEVER fecking tell you whether it's case sensitive or not, or where they use identical characters for zero and letter O, one and letter I, etc. Give me a chess puzzle any day! PS: One tip I've found for trying to minimise reCAptcha killing rage is the "Buster" [0] plugin, which uses Google's AI against itself by using voice recognition to solve the audio ones. Unfortunately, it seems to work less and less reliably of late, which makes me think Google have got wise to it. I used to have almost 100% success 1st go with Buster. Now, it often takes me 2 or 3 goes before it works properly. Still infinitely less annoying than having to solve them manually, though. Tip no. 2: If Buster doesn't work, or you haven't got it installed, I've found that the audio reCaptchas are actually a lot quicker to solve anyway. I've found out you don't need to transcribe the entire audio. I can usually pass one by identifying just one word out or even part of a word out of the phrase spoken. My most satisfying ones ever are when the phrase contains the word "the" and I'm able to pass the reCaptcha just by typing in "the". In your face, Google! [0] https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/buster-captcha-solver-for/mpbjkejclgfgadiemmefgebjfooflfhl https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/buster-captcha-sol... [0] https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/addon/buster-captcha-solver https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/addon/buster-captch...
  - bllguo 6y ago
    > If I'm told to click on "traffic lights" does that mean just the lights?... or the poles as well?... and what about a square that only has a tiny bit in it? Does that count too, or is it only squares which are mostly filled by the object in question? I empathize with the first part of the question. As for the second - I'm fairly positive they want you to count the mostly-filled squares too, considering that the labels are for object-detection models

Interesting idea but disappointing that the versions on the websites are just gif images, not actual demos we can test. [Probably just as well, as I can only solve the 'mate in one' puzzle, in two!]

HenryBemis 6y ago

Intersting idea yes, and I will make sure I will never go back to that website. Identifying fire hydrants or bicycles is annoying enough, but it takes 3-4 seconds. Setting up a chess board for 10 seconds? No thank you. If it is a service I use I will only write them once to complain, and if that doesn't go away I will drop them off (aka stop paying them)(and make sure they know why). Security and Convenience are (most times) opposites. I don't want to spend 10-20secs to log in to a site. Especially if I am paying them.

rozab 6y ago
When have you ever filled in a captcha for a paid service?
- bluGill 6y ago
  Hilton honors requires it to book a room with points. I finally called and spoke with a person, my privacy settings mean I rarely pass, and those are set that way for a reason.
- HenryBemis 6y ago
  Spotify, Dropbox, Carbonite are three that come to mind right now. The login screen doesn't know I got a paying account until after I have logged in.
Normille 6y ago
> Identifying fire hydrants or bicycles is annoying enough, but it takes 3-4 seconds. Setting up a chess board for 10 seconds? No thank you. I'd actually prefer something like the chess puzzle to the normal reCaptchas. I find those so annoying that, unless I really need to access the site in question, I'll just close the page as soon as I see one. [Are you listening webmasters!] Mind you, I'm impressed you can solve a reCaptcha in "3-4 seconds". They usually take me a hell of a lot longer than that because: 1: It's never made clear exactly what you're supposed to click on. For example. If I'm told to click on "traffic lights" does that mean just the lights?... or the poles as well?... and what about a square that only has a tiny bit in it? Does that count too, or is it only squares which are mostly filled by the object in question? 2: They make no concession to non-US English speakers. I've been asked to identify things before, where I had to guess what the word means because the same thing is called something completely different in UK English. The only thing that approaches the level of rage that reCaptchas instil in me are those captchas where you've got to transcribe what's in a photo of some letters & numbers and where they NEVER fecking tell you whether it's case sensitive or not, or where they use identical characters for zero and letter O, one and letter I, etc. Give me a chess puzzle any day! PS: One tip I've found for trying to minimise reCAptcha killing rage is the "Buster" [0] plugin, which uses Google's AI against itself by using voice recognition to solve the audio ones. Unfortunately, it seems to work less and less reliably of late, which makes me think Google have got wise to it. I used to have almost 100% success 1st go with Buster. Now, it often takes me 2 or 3 goes before it works properly. Still infinitely less annoying than having to solve them manually, though. Tip no. 2: If Buster doesn't work, or you haven't got it installed, I've found that the audio reCaptchas are actually a lot quicker to solve anyway. I've found out you don't need to transcribe the entire audio. I can usually pass one by identifying just one word out or even part of a word out of the phrase spoken. My most satisfying ones ever are when the phrase contains the word "the" and I'm able to pass the reCaptcha just by typing in "the". In your face, Google! [0] https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/buster-captcha-solver-for/mpbjkejclgfgadiemmefgebjfooflfhl https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/buster-captcha-sol... [0] https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/addon/buster-captcha-solver https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/addon/buster-captch...
- bllguo 6y ago
  > If I'm told to click on "traffic lights" does that mean just the lights?... or the poles as well?... and what about a square that only has a tiny bit in it? Does that count too, or is it only squares which are mostly filled by the object in question? I empathize with the first part of the question. As for the second - I'm fairly positive they want you to count the mostly-filled squares too, considering that the labels are for object-detection models