SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 40 of 40
  1. #26
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    17
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevie D View Post

    I managed to make it work, but quite frankly the accessibility and usability there is horrendous. It took me ages to work out what I was trying to do, and whether it mattered that the hand was reversed and some fingers were curled. When they get crossed over, it's even more difficult. Yes, I managed, but I'm trying to imagine my parents coming across that and even understanding it, let alone successfully completing it, and the answer is simply "does not compute"
    Thank you! Indeed, It only means, that the quality is bad , but, what if there was a clear photo of a real hand (just imagine)? Does it make sense? By the way, you've said something about instructions - what it should be? I tried hard to make it short and explicit at the same time, but English is not my native language, as you may guess

  2. #27
    It's all Geek to me silver trophybronze trophy
    ralph.m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Melbourne, AU
    Posts
    24,331
    Mentioned
    463 Post(s)
    Tagged
    8 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Gestcha View Post
    captcha is a curse of free web, and the only way to get rid of it permanently (also IMHO) is to give up the idea of anonymity itself. So, the only way to get into the shop without bothering the clown in the doorway is to replace this clown by a policeman. To show him a passport every time can be much better idea?
    The mistake with most of these captcha methods is that they put the onus on everyone, including honest people. The ideal method is to leave honest people alone and filter out the bad guys. So the trick is to identify the traits of the dishonest ones and target those. For example, a bot will fill out a form in a flash and submit, whereas a real human will take a while to do the job. So, put a timer on the form, and abort it if it's filled in too quickly. That's the sort of thing that should be pursued, instead of making honest people jump through hoops. I've tried your captcha 5 or 6 times, and each time I have done it correctly (IMHO) and yet still failed to get past the gatekeeper. The only reason I tried it once was to test it out for your sake; but as I've said above, in the real world I would not bother, as I long ago decided not to play insulting games like this.

  3. #28
    SitePoint Wizard Stomme poes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    10,283
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by gestcha
    Wow! It was a cry from the hart! Come on, guys, don't get me wrong. I'm just an ordinary guy, trying to turn something that is real bad, insecure and inaccessible by almost everybody into something, that is may be just slightly more accessible - that's all. Frankly speaking, IMHO, captcha is a curse of free web, and the only way to get rid of it permanently (also IMHO) is to give up the idea of anonymity itself. So, the only way to get into the shop without bothering the clown in the doorway is to replace this clown by a policeman. To show him a passport every time can be much better idea? (I'm sure - more convenient for some people). May be both? To give you freedom of choice? Why there should be somebody in the doorway AT ALL? - you could ask (and cry . Hey, internet is not a real life, sure, but it's not a dream-world also. It has some obvious advantages, but disadvantages (derived from advantages, by the way) as well, so ... this off-topic is real HUGE, but meaningless and useless, I think.
    :D

    I can't hate you for trying to do *something* about the problem, fer sure... Guess it's my Inner Social Justice Warrior or something.

  4. #29
    It's all Geek to me silver trophybronze trophy
    ralph.m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Melbourne, AU
    Posts
    24,331
    Mentioned
    463 Post(s)
    Tagged
    8 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Stomme poes View Post
    Guess it's my Inner Social Justice Warrior or something.
    You aren't just speaking for people on the "fringe", though—at least on this matter. As someone who doesn't really have any "disabilities" as such (except perhaps cognitive, if my wife is to be believed), I find captchas near impossible to get right a lot of the time, and it drives me nuts [said the guy with a steering wheel on his lap]. This is an accessibility issue that affects everyone.

  5. #30
    SitePoint Wizard Stomme poes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    10,283
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Someone on the twitters suggested that, in addition to my mountains of b*tching about CAPTCHAs, that this thread's probably also a good place to link to alternatives, even though they've been posted before in other random places. Good idea.

    Karl Groves lists a bunch he personally uses together to create one uber-super-system:
    http://www.karlgroves.com/2012/04/03...less-security/

    this is an oldie which has apparently been the basis of some WordPress and other anti-spam plugins:
    http://nedbatchelder.com/text/stopbots.html

    for example some techniques mentioned on http://daniemon.com/blog/block-comme...hout-captchas/ link to a plugin called Cookies for Comments which combines techniques but mostly uses the unique timestampy id thing.

  6. #31
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    17
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ralph.m View Post
    The mistake with most of these captcha methods is that they put the onus on everyone, including honest people. The ideal method is to leave honest people alone and filter out the bad guys. So the trick is to identify the traits of the dishonest ones and target those. For example, a bot will fill out a form in a flash and submit, whereas a real human will take a while to do the job. So, put a timer on the form, and abort it if it's filled in too quickly. That's the sort of thing that should be pursued, instead of making honest people jump through hoops. I've tried your captcha 5 or 6 times, and each time I have done it correctly (IMHO) and yet still failed to get past the gatekeeper. The only reason I tried it once was to test it out for your sake; but as I've said above, in the real world I would not bother, as I long ago decided not to play insulting games like this.
    So, captcha-haters all around here Seriously, guys, captcha is just a method. Please, don't demonize it! Is there any possibility for friendship? Your highly adored (and quite sophisticated) methods with timers, filters, honey-pots can be very effective, sure, but sometimes it's just not enough! If some suspicious attempt was discovered there by these services, why not to offer him to solve a captcha? Real strong (unbeatable may be) captcha? I would have no objections here! As an example - just recently I'd been trying to register on some site and got the same answer all the time - "Spammers are not allowed" - something like this. No further explanation! Is it more fair than captcha's approach? I spent some time trying to figure out what's wrong till remembered that I'd forgotten: I was using proxy. Stupid, you think? May be. But I had no clue what was happening and who was a real stupid here: me, my computer or some web developer (Ooops, I didn' say that ). Captcha at least let me know that the only one fool here - it's me (in most of the time - if it works correctly). So, something like this - your turn

  7. #32
    Mouse catcher silver trophy Stevie D's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Yorkshire, UK
    Posts
    5,892
    Mentioned
    123 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Gestcha View Post
    So, captcha-haters all around here Seriously, guys, captcha is just a method. Please, don't demonize it! Is there any possibility for friendship? Your highly adored (and quite sophisticated) methods with timers, filters, honey-pots can be very effective, sure, but sometimes it's just not enough! If some suspicious attempt was discovered there by these services, why not to offer him to solve a captcha? Real strong (unbeatable may be) captcha? I would have no objections here! As an example - just recently I'd been trying to register on some site and got the same answer all the time - "Spammers are not allowed" - something like this. No further explanation! Is it more fair than captcha's approach? I spent some time trying to figure out what's wrong till remembered that I'd forgotten: I was using proxy. Stupid, you think? May be. But I had no clue what was happening and who was a real stupid here: me, my computer or some web developer (Ooops, I didn' say that ). Captcha at least let me know that the only one fool here - it's me (in most of the time - if it works correctly). So, something like this - your turn
    I think you're getting there – use the Captcha when the hidden, non-intrusive, automated tests suggest that there might be a problem. Or put it in for manual approval. But use those other tools first, and if they suggest the attempt is genuine then accept it without any further challenges. Only if you try that and find that you're getting loads of bogus attempts being passed should you consider making users jump through hoops.

  8. #33
    SitePoint Wizard Stomme poes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    10,283
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Dammit. First, I have to say the ajaxy-saving method crap here does absolutelyy ZIP. I'm retyping this for the second time. I breathed on a button apparently.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gestcha
    So, captcha-haters all around here Seriously, guys, captcha is just a method. Please, don't demonize it! Is there any possibility for friendship?
    You know, I don't want to be the douchebag who tells someone they're re-inventing the wheel badly, if only because it's through someone screwing around with something that new things get discovered. Like that dude who found mold ruining his kitchen experiment and decided to just see what happened instead of throwing it all in the trash because sh*t was definitely certainly f*cked. Bam, we get nice new drugs, because he didn't listen to the rest.

    There was a guy here on the forums a while back, wanting to use regular expressions to "parse" English to reliably separate full sentences. While the rest of us pointed out the innumerable exceptions he'd need to even start getting normal sentence separation and his regex started growing tentacles and smelling like old socks, and while we told him "trying to parse a non-regular language (such as a natural language, which is not regular) with regular expressions (even non-regular regexen with lookaheads and lookbehinds and the such) will call Zalgo and you should use a natural language parser instead", I think we may have prevented someone from going ahead and doing something we thought was stupid, when possibly he could have either
    - taught himself better than we ever could by his attempt failing, or
    - discovered something we'd never see because we "knew better"

    He kept saying "well but nobody's even tried this!" Now, lots have, that's how we've all learned the hard way the limits of regexen, but... it was probably wrong of us to push down on his head to make him stop, because that's kinda dumb to do to someone excited about trying something out and getting the experience of Doing Stuff.
    Honestly, I've never seen a CAPTCHA that was anything like this before. It's probably not a good CAPTCHA (if there was such a thing), but that doesn't mean it's not interesting or could never be useful.

    Getscha, keep working on this. It could end up being a new idea in something in e-learning or physical therapy or lord knows what. Don't let us depress you into just stopping. What do we know? We know that CAPTCHA sucks, which you already know and have agreed with us and was the whole reason you started this in the first place... and my only legitimate point is that CAPTCHA is not *only* annoying, it's discriminatory, but that alone isn't reason to abandon this idea. It's unusual. That means it demands thinking in unusual ways. Which may or may not run into a dead end... which you won't know until you try it, and you've been trying it with us... well, listen to us (LISTEN TO ME, ME, MEEEE!!!), but I can't say this is a totally worthless endeavour.

    Keep us posted on where this goes.

    As an example - just recently I'd been trying to register on some site and got the same answer all the time - "Spammers are not allowed" - something like this. No further explanation! Is it more fair than captcha's approach?
    No way, that's totally user-hating and wherever you were trying to register (even if it was here!) doesn't deserve any users if they treat them that way. That's where all *my* hate come from-- making life even crappier for human peoples because some developer wanted to whip out some easy-for-him but hard-for-users solution. CAPTCHA is a "solution" people whip out because they're told "it will stop spam". Bah.
    But I had no clue what was happening and who was a real stupid here: me, my computer or some web developer
    They say, Einsteins, when they sit behind a computer, immediately lose 50 IQ points and become Gumps. No matter how "smart" the user is, unless they're actually building freaking nuclear rockets with that web application, they should be as smart or as stupid as people just are, and should be able to fulfill their tasks *without headache*. The developer was the dumb one here, not you, no matter if you actually were stupid or not. If a developer can't build it idiot-proof, it's not ready for the real world and needs fixing. What's the definition of a "good developer"?

    Captcha at least let me know that the only one fool here - it's me (in most of the time - if it works correctly).
    CAPTCHA's job isn't to determine if you're "good enough" to join a forum, buy a service, add a comment, or scratch your butt. It didn't tell you that you were stupid or made a mistake-- you're a person, which means you automatically do those things (stupid things, make mistakes). Good applications work with this, because they're built for people, not infallible machines. Bad applications make you feel like crap for being a *normal* stupid average screwing-up human being.

    And that's just wrong. Internets don't need more of that. We have TV and hipsters to tell us we're dumb already.

  9. #34
    It's all Geek to me silver trophybronze trophy
    ralph.m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Melbourne, AU
    Posts
    24,331
    Mentioned
    463 Post(s)
    Tagged
    8 Thread(s)
    Nice sentiments, poes.

    I guess the ideal would be a non-intrusive first layer (time stamp etc.) and then present a captcha if there is something fishy—like a proxy or whatever. At least the most legitimate users get through the door without being hassled, while the others get a second chance—albeit harder.

    Anyhow, saw this online today (or a version of it) and couldn't resist posting it here:

    odear1.jpg

  10. #35
    Programming Since 1978 silver trophybronze trophy felgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Sydney, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    16,871
    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    I took a look at the page linked in the original post.

    If that were ever to appear on a page I'd do what I did this time - hit the back button and leave straight away.

    These days it is relatively easy to install a two tier CAPTCHA approach where the first CAPTCHA is completely invisible to the user and those who pass that one (taking long enough to fill out the form, having JavaScript enabled) get in without ever seeing the second CAPTCHA - which is added to the already filled out form when a fail of the first CAPTCHA occurs.
    Stephen J Chapman

    javascriptexample.net, Book Reviews, follow me on Twitter
    HTML Help, CSS Help, JavaScript Help, PHP/mySQL Help, blog
    <input name="html5" type="text" required pattern="^$">

  11. #36
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    17
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Stomme poes View Post
    because some developer wanted to whip out some easy-for-him but hard-for-users solution. CAPTCHA is a "solution" people whip out because they're told "it will stop spam". Bah.
    Oh, I've got it, finally! It's all clear now for me, I was a real stupid, sorry. Caused so many words about something so little concerned the original topic but can't even understand what it's all about. Now I understand: the whole fuss is about "captcha's ugly face of discrimination" and why it's so appealing to developers (the last is even more important, right?). But I absolutely don't mind your holy war against that! Although, I, personally, believe in much more natural ways for justice here. Internet is a living being and it will die without our love . There is no need for a fight! I'll try to express it in several words: user-unfriendly sites will just die out by themselves because a lot of others are around - my captcha hardly could change it. There are a lot of us, who ignore such sites already and will be more - this is what I'm talking about. So, you try to propagandise your vision here - OK, but is there anybody here who can say something on topic?

  12. #37
    Life is not a malfunction gold trophysilver trophybronze trophy
    TechnoBear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Argyll, Scotland
    Posts
    6,444
    Mentioned
    274 Post(s)
    Tagged
    5 Thread(s)
    Off Topic:

    Quote Originally Posted by ralph.m View Post
    Anyhow, saw this online today (or a version of it) and couldn't resist posting it here:

    odear1.jpg
    I love it.


    Quote Originally Posted by felgall View Post
    I took a look at the page linked in the original post.

    If that were ever to appear on a page I'd do what I did this time - hit the back button and leave straight away.
    ... which just goes to show you can't please all the people all the time. As I said at the start, I like the idea.

    I agree with everything that's been said about captchas as an accessibility nightmare and the sooner they become a thing of the past the better, as far as I'm concerned. However, from a purely personal point of view, I do find this an improvement on the standard letter-based captchas. My vision is fine (as long as I'm wearing my glasses), but I have problems of perception. I, too, find captchas so difficult that I generally abandon sites that employ them, unless I absolutely have to use that site, but I found this easier to deal with. Perhaps it's because there are a more limited number of possibilities, which reduces with each dot you assign.

    On the other hand (no pun intended) I also have problems of co-ordination, and on a bad day, would have no chance of completing this. But then, even on a pretty good day I have no chance of completing most current captchas, so that's still an improvement.

    Quote Originally Posted by ralph.m View Post
    I guess the ideal would be a non-intrusive first layer (time stamp etc.) and then present a captcha if there is something fishy—like a proxy or whatever. At least the most legitimate users get through the door without being hassled, while the others get a second chance—albeit harder.
    Agreed.

    I'm never going to fail a test for being too fast at filling out a form , but if suspicious behaviour includes repeatedly mistyping things, putting the wrong information in the wrong field or being unable to provide a phone number, then I could well be suspicious. In that case, I would much prefer the option of this task to a "normal" captcha.

    Just a personal view. (I think I'm wandering into the territory of poes' other excellent post. Other excellent recent post, I should say - otherwise it sounds as if she's only ever made one. )
    Don't serve your porridge and then go out for a walk.

  13. #38
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    17
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thank you, TechnoBear, so much! Actually, when I'd been thinking about an early concept I meant to give some improvement not only to people without any health problem, but may be to people with dyslexia (and children of' course - as a father). Actually, I don't know if they would really need it, but still. So, your comment blows an extra amount of wind in my sails!

  14. #39
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    17
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hi, everybody, it's me again. I've just reread comments carefully and, actually, if I could I'd wipe out the whole topic. Never thought, that I can be so arrogant - but I just wasn't prepeared for such a strong dislike for the topic itself, that was shocked. I'm sorry. Bye.
    P.S. Thank you, TechnoBear, once again!

  15. #40
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    17
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hi, guys, it's me again. Please, try the new version - now with significantly improved graphics. I've made my best to show everything as clear as possible here.


Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •