3 ms·
>> It displayed a pair of words, one of which was unambiguously resolved by an OCR and the other of which OCRs couldn’t easily read. The first word was used to
by gambiting 4y ago
>> It displayed a pair of words, one of which was unambiguously resolved by an OCR and the other of which OCRs couldn’t easily read. The first word was used to disambiguate humans from bots, and the second word was used to train the OCR.
Was I the only person who has always inserted some nonsense word as my answer for the clearly scanned word? It was very obvious which word was generated and would be checked, and which one was scanned and which wouldn't be checked just accepted as-is. I always just typed in something else other than the word - I think it was just being contrarian against being used by a corporation to do their word recognition for them for free.
- rollcat 4y ago4chan famously promoted the usage of the n-word for that purpose. You're going to get enough wrong answers even with compliant users - I'm 100% positive any dev with at least two brain cells and a passing grade in statistics would be able to filter all of these out of the dataset. But yeah, I also cross the street on the red light.
- huggingmouth 4y agoI do the same with the self-driving training images. Want reliable input? Pay me.
- rkagerer 4y agoCrazy, I always assumed they sent the same prompts to multiple users and cross-checked.
- gambiting 4y agoI mean, they probably do - so if 9/10 people said the word is "apple" and I said it's "banana" then it will accept apple. But at the same time I can't imagine I was the only one doing this.
- rkagerer 4y agoSure, but unless you're coordinating with other adversaries it shouldn't be hard for them to filter out the deviant responses.