Captcha identify

[Eric S. Johansson]

On 8/13/2014 3:27 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> I agree with you, and I don't use CAPTCHAs on any of my services,
> anywhere, and never have. (Partly because they *are* broken by people
> writing scripts, and/or by just grinding them with human solvers; but
> also because of the problems they cause for legit users, even those
> with perfect eyesight.) However, the accessibility argument is one for
> the removal of the captcha, *not* for its automated solving. I will
> not support a scripted captcha solver for any reason. If you move away
> from a site because you can't use it, so be it. If you get a chance,
> tell the owner that there are alternatives to barely-readable images;
> tricks involving page layouts are almost always safe, and there's
> infinite room to play around in them.

your suggestion reminds me of the time I asked front range for help with 
accessibility because I had to use Goldmine on the job. Immediately 
after I asked for accessibility information, they told me they don't 
have any accessibility information because they don't have any disabled 
users.

Yes, they really did

your suggestion will probably generate a similar response.


>
> There is no valid reason for automating something that's specifically
> to prevent automation. The admin needs to provide an alternative,
> instead.

There is only one valid reason based in the fact that we don't own or 
control many of the sites we depend on. Therefore, if I need to use a 
site be it government or commercial and it has a Captcha, I need to pay 
some form of cripple tax by either incurring pain or find/pay somebody 
to type for me. In this situation I thing it is perfectly acceptable to 
automate bypassing Captcha's.