|
|
Posted by dorayme on 05/08/07 23:00
In article <v1j143lpjpuegc5e05quam7r9hf63ecrqd@4ax.com>,
let@it.snow wrote:
> >In article <46375460$0$20597$4d3efbfe@news.sover.net>,
> > Leif K-Brooks <eurleif@ecritters.biz> wrote:
> >
> > ...I would suggest you give them a link to a real
> >> CAPTCHA, with real security. Luckily, quite a few of them are available
> >> for free; for example, QuickCaptcha:
> >> <http://www.web1marketing.com/resources/tools/quickcaptcha/>.
> >
>
> Can someone help me integrate this Quickcaptcha with my two contact
> forms? This should be a really easy job and I'm willing to pay US$ 50
> by PayPal for the work. I'm not a PHP coder so I'd be unable to do the
> job myself.
Alternatively, you could post a question at alt.php, there are
many helpful people there.
One thing to note about this particular "Turing" test technique
is the difficulty not a few people will face in reading the
correct numbers even though well sighted. As discussed in this
thread.
I think there must be better implementations. One simple thing
better would be for the whole image to be about 5 times bigger!
That would solve many of the difficulties. And the idea of
confusing backgrounds can be taken too far. If the images were to
be bigger and the background plain white, you could turing away
on the distortion to the letters and it all would be easier for
humans, but I doubt easier for robots.
Letters are a very limited idea for this sort of thing. What
humans are good at is pattern recognition and background
knowledge of the world. Better to have things like "Was Marilyn
Monroe an actor, an athlete, a prime minister etc out of a big
field. A few human slam dunkers and the punter has to get over
90% score or whatever, a robot not having a chance. There are
many other things that would give crisper results.
--
dorayme
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|