| > the vast majority of which will not be empathically awful Yeah, most of the time it's "just" really, really obnoxious, not to mention coercive in a way that aligns with Google's interests. Thanks, Google. > How, in your opinion, should Google have handled the matter in a way that does not give spammers or other abusive users ways to get around the measure? "Our anti-spam systems believe that you might be a robot. Your profile has been locked for (x) minutes. Sorry for the inconvenience. Go _here_ to learn tips & tricks for avoiding lockouts in the future." X gets exponentially ramped. Note how vague the message is. It sacrifices the opportunity to tarpit a really dumb robot in exchange for not being awful to humans. Based on ReCAPTCHA's design decisions, it's abundantly clear that eeking out every sliver of a percent of marginal efficacy is the priority over treating users humanely. That's why I have a problem with ReCAPTCHA. |
Thank you for sharing! Have you considered the possibility that presenting any message at all - especially one with a clear block time - is sending a very clear message to bot controllers? I'm sure you've considered this, and I am just failing to understand. Wouldn't that remove any real gains from being vague with tips & tricks?
Wouldn't there also be the real chance that vague tips & tricks would leave an actual human being in tears, convinced that they're just too dumb to understand them properly?