Hi, We slightly updated http://remaptcha.herokuapp.com/ : It now validates the second control word (nearby the flag) better.
BUT now, we have another variant #2 which has two steps: http://remaptcha2.herokuapp.com/ A variant means to me that's another possible solution (i.e. it's not Version 2). LG, Stefan 2014-04-05 12:18 GMT+02:00 Stefan Keller <sfkel...@gmail.com>: > Hi, > > We've slightly updated ReMAPTCHA plugin. > > -S. > > [1] http://remaptcha.herokuapp.com/ > > > > > 2014-03-31 18:47 GMT+02:00 moltonel 3x Combo <molto...@gmail.com>: > > On 31/03/2014, Stefan Keller <sfkel...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > The scrambling of the Control Word" is as intense as other Captchas but >> > it's only 5-6 chars (instead of 10 or more). >> >> Hum, taking another look, it does seem more scrambled than I remember. >> But when I first checked, there was only text over the map, not over >> the imagery, so you changed stuff :p >> >> It's better, but I still feel it's not as scrambled as the typical >> ReCAPTCHA; for example it doesn't have anything overlaying it. >> >> > We can afford this because an OCR needs to find first the boundaries of >> the >> > word - and that's more difficult with labels on a map. >> >> One major flaw with displaying the text on both layers (rendered and >> satellite) is that you can substract one image from the other to be >> left with just the text without noise. >> >> Map labels are rare enough in the examples I saw. They might also be >> easyly filtered out as being non-scrambled and using known typefaces. >> >> And if we get an area with many labels that somehow confuse a bot but >> not a user, we're back to the "got a few words, try to give >> combinations at random" problem. >> >> > You have to realize that the other word has to be written just to >> indicate >> > if there is a path - else you can ommit it. >> >> Yes. >> >> > The fact that there is a path is unknown to our system. >> >> I don't understand that part. You've created the chalenges, so you >> must know the answer ? >> >> > So in your estimation, humans always succeded when only typing the >> "Control >> > Word". >> > That (human) trick and not knowing the correct answer for the "Control >> > Word" applies to all reCAPTCHAs. >> > Bots need first to find 1. which one is the Control Word (including >> > boundary) and then 2. to try OCR. >> >> Part of my point is that the bot doesn't need to distinguish the >> control word from the other word (assuming it OCRed the words >> correctly, see above). It has a 33% chance of getting it right >> randomly, which is fine. A 10% overall success rate is not an issue >> for a bot (but would be for a human). >> >> >> Please drop the "scrambled text" idea altogether. And make solving a >> >> CAPTCHA a fun activity in the process. >> > >> > Feedback so far was, that it's at least more fun than typing 15 >> characters >> > and helping G* instead of OSM. >> >> That's my feedback too :) Note that I wouldn't be commenting if I >> thought the work didn't have merit :p >> >> But I'm afraid that the fun will quickly disapear, because we still >> have to squint and type, and because you'll notice that you need to >> raise the scrambling-related difficulty because bots still get thru. >> >> >> ... A "click features on the >> >> satellite imagery" task is one way to do it, but I'm sure there are >> >> others. >> > >> > This seems like a good idea and I'm open to collect those. >> >> I hope you'll explore the idea, so. >> >> There have been plenty of other attempts with image-based no-typing >> CAPTCHAs (search those terms), but I think that they suffered from the >> high cost of getting tagged source material. An OSM-backed satellite >> imagery CAPTCHA would have a huge amount of source material readily >> available. >> >> > Unfortunately nobody came up until now with one, which fulfilled the >> > properties of a reCAPTCHA, i.e. fast and easy to understand challenge by >> > humans. >> >> I guess it's the usual problem of plenty of people having their idea >> about a feature, but it takes one person to actually go and do the >> work before they reallize that they had different features in mind, or >> that it was a bad idea... Thanks for working on that :) >> > >
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk