←back to thread

133 points timshell | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.208s | source
Show context
imiric ◴[] No.44378450[source]
I applaud the effort. We need human-friendly CAPTCHAs, as much as they're generally disliked. They're the only solution to the growing spam and abuse problem on the web.

Proof-of-work CAPTCHAs work well for making bots expensive to run at scale, but they still rely on accurate bot detection. Avoiding both false positives and negatives is crucial, yet all existing approaches are not reliable enough.

One comment re:

> While AI agents can theoretically simulate these patterns, the effort likely outweighs other alternatives.

For now. Behavioral and cognitive signals seem to work against the current generation of bots, but will likely also be defeated as AI tools become cheaper and more accessible. It's only a matter of time until attackers can train a model on real human input, and inference to be cheap enough. Or just for the benefit of using a bot on a specific target to outweigh the costs.

So I think we will need a different detection mechanism. Maybe something from the real world, some type of ID, or even micropayments. I'm not sure, but it's clear that bot detection is at the opposite, and currently losing, side of the AI race.

replies(11): >>44378709 #>>44379146 #>>44379545 #>>44380175 #>>44380453 #>>44380659 #>>44380693 #>>44382515 #>>44384051 #>>44387254 #>>44389004 #
turnsout ◴[] No.44379146[source]
Exactly. If the financial incentive is there, they'll add sufficient jitter to trick the detector, and eventually train an ML model to make it even more realistic.
replies(1): >>44379234 #
timshell ◴[] No.44379234[source]
Yes and no. Traditional CAPTCHAs didn't cause bot farms to advance computer vision
replies(4): >>44379973 #>>44380078 #>>44380767 #>>44381765 #
lucb1e ◴[] No.44380767[source]
I don't see how that contradicts the parent post. Computer vision wasn't as good when reCAPTCHA was still typing out books, but machine learning has (per my expectation, having worked with it since ~2015, but the proof would be in the pudding) likely been good enough for mimicking e.g. keystroke timings for decades. It hasn't been needed until now. That doesn't mean they won't use it now that it is needed. Different situation from where tech did not yet exist
replies(1): >>44381088 #
1. timshell ◴[] No.44381088[source]
Section 3 anticipates and addresses this objection.

The ultimate challenge is to replicate end-to-end natural human cognition, which is currently an unsolved and hard problem (and also not necessarily the main focus of AI researchers).