They won't be getting removed.

2 months

Facebook login only

Just you fucking wait

what else is there to do against spam?

captcha helps

Never. Moot is faggoting around canvas instead of working on 4chan.

>>15723839
Protip: moot gets payed to use Re-CAPTCHA

>>15723886
how? I see no adds...

>>15723908
let me put it this way: if moot doesn't get payed, he is getting ripped off.

New York Times pays ReCaptcha big dollars to digitize their archives.
The more people use ReCaptcha, the more money they make.
Moot is responsible for millions of ReCaptcha's per day.

>>15724080
Most of them containing "nigger".

>>15724080
I c, so the words we verify have their roots in some article or the likes. What benefit has this for NYT though

>>15724080
Because Google isn't doing this under the guise of 'it's for a good cause!', right?

>>15724145
you are digitizing old paper articles

WHY THE FUCK does he have to use tedious recaptcha instead of something, you know, a little more fucking suitable for a high post rate imageboard.

http://rei-ayanami.net/general/

Here is an example of an imageboard captcha done right. Simple, and each time you type it it gives you 5 post slots.

But the idea of moot doing something useful, preposterous.

>>15724145
>What benefit has this for NYT though

NYT wants to digitize their archives. (for whatever reason, probably to sell it to historians)
This takes a HUGE amount of work.
But instead of paying employees, they make us work for them for free.

>>15724131
>Most of them containing "nigger".

That's true, but they can filter that out.
Eventually someone will give them the real answers.

>>15724191
Why not just do it once and set a cookie for the entire session? I asked MrVacBob this the day reCAPTCHA was implemented and he said he'd 'think about it.'

>>15724080
I c, so the words we verify have their roots in some article or the likes. But if the OCR software was unable to decipher the scans, how can it judge our input being wrong/correct...

[spoiler]knowing about this now makes me feel like a workhorse enriching some selfish prick somewhere on this world, these juice sure know how to generate money from nothing

>>15724161
>Because Google isn't doing this under the guise of 'it's for a good cause!', right?

That might be their excuse.
But it's not really a good cause, though, it's slave labor.
If it were really a good cause people would volunteer for it, not having to be FORCED into the scheme.

>>15724244
>under the guise of
>inverted commas
HOW DID THAT FLY STRAIGHT OVER YOUR HEAD?

yeah! indigenous never had the wheel and this is the great thing.. the wheel is one of the guilty on destroy of the earth. sorry about my english.. i dont speak so good

>>15724223
>But if the OCR software was unable to decipher the scans, how can it judge our input being wrong/correct...

Notice there are always two words.

One is already known (the real CAPTCHA part)
The other one is unknown, it's only there to provide slave labor for the new York Times.

Because you can't tell which one is which, you are forced to try your best on both - unless one is impossible (in that case you can put "nigger" or just a space).
If you solved the CAPTCHA part correctly, it will assume you also solved the slave labor part correctly.
To be entirely sure, it will re-ask the same slave labor part until 3 people gave the same answer.

>>15724191
Moot had given such a CAPTCHA a try (if you noscripted recaptcha you got it), but the virus author quickly coded in some OCR and that persistent spam started right back up again. So he went with reCAPTCHA.

>>15724222
Session logins = hire an african to solve like 1000 captchas, give the result to 1000 different computers so they can solve and get a session cookie. Once the user has a session, they can spam freely, so if some retard downloads a virus and runs it, it can get the cookie.

Not effort free, but Firefox/Chrome/Safari/IE all have caches that you could steal the cookie from.

>>15724217
Google does this.

The computers are good at recognizing most words, but when it's uncertain, it gives them to humans.

It gets thousands of words corrected in a variety of books (not just the NYT) that would be left uncorrected otherwise while providing a novel antispam solution.

>>15724244
No one is forcing you to solve reCAPTCHAs. The site owner decides to implement it. If you disagree, stop visiting the site. Easy.

>>15724080
As far as I know, Google doesn't get paid for reCAPTCHA results. In fact, Google has to pay to display much of the content in Google Books.

>>15724080
Also:
>if moot doesn't get payed, he is getting ripped off.
No, moot gets an easy to implement CAPTCHA that's accessible to the blind and a bitch to beat that's being constantly updated with new words from Google to prevent it from being easily beaten.

That is something that is NOT trivial to implement.

>>15724365
>Session logins = hire an african to solve like 1000 captchas, give the result to 1000 different computers so they can solve and get a session cookie.
Figured as much, but
a) 4chan isn't that worth spamming. I was surprised it wasn't spammed more often.
b) It can't be fully automated, and if the user is banned it takes *some* effort to start over. Probably won't be worth it.
Though then again, this would mean having active mods...

>>15724312
pretty nifty, they even have insurance making sure their project cant get sabotaged.

Now that we covered that, how about canvas networks. Reply made earlier in this thread mentioning it sparked my interest. What I got from my searches it's going to be something like 4chan but archived, with each poster's work credited respectivily. It exploits the human trait "need for attention", card that all social networks play by, stimulating people to use the service for the 5 min of fame. Guess that'll mean a big migration of tripfaggots, doesnt it

>>15724417
http://www.quantcast.com/4chan.org
>4M americans
>7.5M global
Are you insane? That's GREAT reach.

>>15724383
>while providing a novel antispam solution.

No, you have to look at it as two completely separate systems: CAPTCHA and slave labor.

We are doing twice the work we would with just a regular CAPTCHA, without making the CAPTCHA any more reliable.

And yeah, we could just not go to 4chan anymore.
But I have no life, you see?

>>15724468
>twice the work
Most reCAPTCHAs are easily legible especially compared to the shit systems on many sites that are entirely illegible (e.g. Rapidshare cats).

The funny thing is a number of captchas that were hard for humans to read (Rapidshare Cats) were trivial for robots.

While reCAPTCHA asks for two words, it's also legible most of the time, and you can reload the CAPTCHA without reloading the page.

>slave labor
Because Google & Google Books provides no benefit to you? Are you shitting me? We're converting books in the public domain so we can browse them for free and have the ability to accurately search them. Don't pretend we don't get nothing in return.

The site owner chooses to implement it, so it's his choice. But don't call it slave labor, that's disingenuous.

>>15723853
2 months

Mass exodous to other chans

Just you wait

>>15724365
How about this:
Everybody gets a session cookie after solving 5 CAPTCHA's.

If a spam attack occurs, a moderator will press a button making ALL cookies invalid instantly.
So the spammers will have to start all over again.

Would be kinda annoying if it happened a lot, but it's always better than a CAPTCHA for every single post.
But then, i still think moot is getting payed for ReCAPTCHA.

>>15723853
4chan's culture is totally at odds with that of, say, Canv.as.

That's why Canv.as hasn't become 4chan 2.0 Beta. moot has a separate site with VC money.

If he does give 4chan the axe, another chan would rise to replace it.

Setup another Random board but with no captcha. Have it set to permaban repeat text like a bastard r9k. Also, permaban any advertising posts found. I'm sure there's tons of potential janitors that would get a kick out of it.

If someone gets a fucking virus they deserve to fuck right off.