5 ms·
To play devil's advocate; it is better to have some kind of fallback when the automated, non-interactive verification does fail. Anecdotally from many posters
by supriyo-biswas 2y ago
To play devil's advocate; it is better to have some kind of fallback when the automated, non-interactive verification does fail.
Anecdotally from many posters here and as I've personally experienced, automated verification (as attempted by some captchas which entirely eliminate any user interaction) is not foolproof, and an escape hatch is necessary from time to time.
While it could be argued that this leaves the captcha vulnerable to automated solving, the fact that there is a small cost to acquiring a GPU server, a captcha solving service, or a image segmentation model does act as a deterrent (even if small).
- dheera 2y agoTime to create a captcha solver Chrome plugin that is continually updated with the latest automated solving to make this easier. Captchas should be deemed an ADA violation.
- gryn 2y ago> Time to create a captcha solver Chrome plugin they already exist (most are paid though with maybe a free quota).
- abid786 2y agoWhy are they an ADA violation? Who are they discriminating against
- ceejayoz 2y agoBlind people? Have you ever tried the audio “alternative” some captchas offer them?
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- hinkley 2y agoI’ve been thinking a better solution might be to architect solutions so that you can roll back changes from any user account (in toto would be easiest, but by time range might also be good for compromised accounts) and like shadow banning, you let the machine in and you flag their account as, “I don’t think this is a human” One you’re pretty sure that the person is real they can do more and more permanent things in your system.