<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Are Negative CAPTCHAs Any More Accessible?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.doitmyselfblog.com/2009/are-negative-captchas-any-more-accessible/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.doitmyselfblog.com/2009/are-negative-captchas-any-more-accessible/</link>
	<description>Your Accessibility Conscience</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2012 00:00:20 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: David Hucklesby</title>
		<link>http://www.doitmyselfblog.com/2009/are-negative-captchas-any-more-accessible/comment-page-1/#comment-327363</link>
		<dc:creator>David Hucklesby</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Mar 2009 01:19:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.doitmyselfblog.com/2009/are-negative-captchas-any-more-accessible/#comment-327363</guid>
		<description>I call these &quot;honeypots.&quot; If I were to do this, I think I&#039;d respond to a mistakenly completed form with a &quot;did you really mean to do this?&quot; page that needs a re-submission, rather than rejecting a comment outright. Would that work?

You sure give us lots to think about, Glenda! Nice one.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I call these &#8220;honeypots.&#8221; If I were to do this, I think I&#8217;d respond to a mistakenly completed form with a &#8220;did you really mean to do this?&#8221; page that needs a re-submission, rather than rejecting a comment outright. Would that work?</p>
<p>You sure give us lots to think about, Glenda! Nice one.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim O'Brien</title>
		<link>http://www.doitmyselfblog.com/2009/are-negative-captchas-any-more-accessible/comment-page-1/#comment-327355</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim O'Brien</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Mar 2009 01:01:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.doitmyselfblog.com/2009/are-negative-captchas-any-more-accessible/#comment-327355</guid>
		<description>Though I can&#039;t say for sure, I think Disaboom&#039;s CAPTCHA is more a sign of the state of technology than anyone&#039;s indifference to universal access. Most anti-spam provisions default to CAPTCHA. You need to be fairly technically proficient to get into the setting to access CAPTCHA controls, never mind to find and implement alternatives. just my thoughts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Though I can&#8217;t say for sure, I think Disaboom&#8217;s CAPTCHA is more a sign of the state of technology than anyone&#8217;s indifference to universal access. Most anti-spam provisions default to CAPTCHA. You need to be fairly technically proficient to get into the setting to access CAPTCHA controls, never mind to find and implement alternatives. just my thoughts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Glenda</title>
		<link>http://www.doitmyselfblog.com/2009/are-negative-captchas-any-more-accessible/comment-page-1/#comment-327254</link>
		<dc:creator>Glenda</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Mar 2009 22:33:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.doitmyselfblog.com/2009/are-negative-captchas-any-more-accessible/#comment-327254</guid>
		<description>The thing that really makes me cringe is when sites like &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.disaboom.com/Community/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Disaboom - an online community for people with disabilities&lt;/a&gt; - use CAPTCHAs on their blogs. Mind you, they don&#039;t caption their videos either. If they don&#039;t get it, is there any hope? Perhaps we would have more success with Amazon!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The thing that really makes me cringe is when sites like <a href="http://www.disaboom.com/Community/" rel="nofollow">Disaboom &#8211; an online community for people with disabilities</a> &#8211; use CAPTCHAs on their blogs. Mind you, they don&#8217;t caption their videos either. If they don&#8217;t get it, is there any hope? Perhaps we would have more success with Amazon!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bob Easton</title>
		<link>http://www.doitmyselfblog.com/2009/are-negative-captchas-any-more-accessible/comment-page-1/#comment-327243</link>
		<dc:creator>Bob Easton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Mar 2009 22:13:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.doitmyselfblog.com/2009/are-negative-captchas-any-more-accessible/#comment-327243</guid>
		<description>Yes, a good spam engine is the best thing for us bloggers. The spam engines are collaborative filters which are shaped by all their users and are reasonably effective. WordPress users get good service from both Akismet and WP-SpamFree.

Moderating first time comment makers takes a step toward what Tim suggests, verifying the address represents a real person. 

Combining those two is great for those of us with blogs.  However, my irritation is with all of the big high traffic services who simply can&#039;t afford that level of verification.

CAPTCHAS (you&#039;re right about upper case) are popping up everywhere and presenting barriers for all sorts of people with disabilities. There&#039;s an ever increasing number of barriers being built.

Tim might be right about something like OpenID being an answer, but that&#039;s an answer the big sites won&#039;t adopt until they know most of their audience has the IDs, and most of the audience won&#039;t get the IDs until they&#039;re pushed into it. Sigh...

hmmmm, Maybe we ought to lobby someone like Amazon to give / nag each of their customers to get an openID?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, a good spam engine is the best thing for us bloggers. The spam engines are collaborative filters which are shaped by all their users and are reasonably effective. WordPress users get good service from both Akismet and WP-SpamFree.</p>
<p>Moderating first time comment makers takes a step toward what Tim suggests, verifying the address represents a real person. </p>
<p>Combining those two is great for those of us with blogs.  However, my irritation is with all of the big high traffic services who simply can&#8217;t afford that level of verification.</p>
<p>CAPTCHAS (you&#8217;re right about upper case) are popping up everywhere and presenting barriers for all sorts of people with disabilities. There&#8217;s an ever increasing number of barriers being built.</p>
<p>Tim might be right about something like OpenID being an answer, but that&#8217;s an answer the big sites won&#8217;t adopt until they know most of their audience has the IDs, and most of the audience won&#8217;t get the IDs until they&#8217;re pushed into it. Sigh&#8230;</p>
<p>hmmmm, Maybe we ought to lobby someone like Amazon to give / nag each of their customers to get an openID?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Glenda</title>
		<link>http://www.doitmyselfblog.com/2009/are-negative-captchas-any-more-accessible/comment-page-1/#comment-327185</link>
		<dc:creator>Glenda</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Mar 2009 18:01:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.doitmyselfblog.com/2009/are-negative-captchas-any-more-accessible/#comment-327185</guid>
		<description>Bob, thank you for clarifying the image above is not a negative CAPTCHA. I now realize the visual is misleading, given the topic. Although, from my understanding, a negative CAPTCHA would not be seen. 

At the moment, if bloggers want to encourage comments, is their best line of defense against spam is to have a good spam engine and to moderate a reader&#039;s first comment? 

By the way, is the preferred form captcha (all lower case) or CAPTCHA (all upper case).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bob, thank you for clarifying the image above is not a negative CAPTCHA. I now realize the visual is misleading, given the topic. Although, from my understanding, a negative CAPTCHA would not be seen. </p>
<p>At the moment, if bloggers want to encourage comments, is their best line of defense against spam is to have a good spam engine and to moderate a reader&#8217;s first comment? </p>
<p>By the way, is the preferred form captcha (all lower case) or CAPTCHA (all upper case).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bob Easton</title>
		<link>http://www.doitmyselfblog.com/2009/are-negative-captchas-any-more-accessible/comment-page-1/#comment-327142</link>
		<dc:creator>Bob Easton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Mar 2009 13:11:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.doitmyselfblog.com/2009/are-negative-captchas-any-more-accessible/#comment-327142</guid>
		<description>Ricky, the image at the top of the page is not a negative captcha. It&#039;s a normal captcha, and yes it is obnoxious! A negative captcha is one that we won&#039;t even recognize.

The idea is that people would see a regular form and no captchas at all. The spam bots would see that same form plus an extra field that people don&#039;t see. If that field comes back filled in, it means a spam bot filled it in.

While a good idea, the nature of the spam war is that the bot designers learn these tricks very quickly and find ways to overcome them.

Bottom line, and it&#039;s a shame, is that the technique is not useful enough to work for large, high-traffic sites. Sure, it appears to work well for the geeky web designer (self-referential) who uses it on his own lightly traveled blog. But it won&#039;t work for Google or Yahoo or other large sites. The spammers can too easily defeat it.

Unfortunately, I think we&#039;re stuck with obnoxious captchas for a long time. You see, the person who comes up with a very effective replacement for the captcha, a very easy to use and highly accurate Turing Test, could be instantly wealthy. And with the way people scheme to make money, someone should have come up with that very lucrative answer by now. They haven&#039;t.

As always, all the best to Glenda. Keep up the great work!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ricky, the image at the top of the page is not a negative captcha. It&#8217;s a normal captcha, and yes it is obnoxious! A negative captcha is one that we won&#8217;t even recognize.</p>
<p>The idea is that people would see a regular form and no captchas at all. The spam bots would see that same form plus an extra field that people don&#8217;t see. If that field comes back filled in, it means a spam bot filled it in.</p>
<p>While a good idea, the nature of the spam war is that the bot designers learn these tricks very quickly and find ways to overcome them.</p>
<p>Bottom line, and it&#8217;s a shame, is that the technique is not useful enough to work for large, high-traffic sites. Sure, it appears to work well for the geeky web designer (self-referential) who uses it on his own lightly traveled blog. But it won&#8217;t work for Google or Yahoo or other large sites. The spammers can too easily defeat it.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, I think we&#8217;re stuck with obnoxious captchas for a long time. You see, the person who comes up with a very effective replacement for the captcha, a very easy to use and highly accurate Turing Test, could be instantly wealthy. And with the way people scheme to make money, someone should have come up with that very lucrative answer by now. They haven&#8217;t.</p>
<p>As always, all the best to Glenda. Keep up the great work!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim O'Brien</title>
		<link>http://www.doitmyselfblog.com/2009/are-negative-captchas-any-more-accessible/comment-page-1/#comment-327138</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim O'Brien</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Mar 2009 13:03:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.doitmyselfblog.com/2009/are-negative-captchas-any-more-accessible/#comment-327138</guid>
		<description>I think the future of anti-spam is in OpenID. Using OpenID, you can use a reputable source to guarantee that you are human and not a spambot. 

Negative CAPTCHAS might stop this generation of spambots, but spammers will just redesign a better spambot. 

To defeat spam, we need some time of confirmation system, either third party (OpenID) or personal (email confirmation or registration).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think the future of anti-spam is in OpenID. Using OpenID, you can use a reputable source to guarantee that you are human and not a spambot. </p>
<p>Negative CAPTCHAS might stop this generation of spambots, but spammers will just redesign a better spambot. </p>
<p>To defeat spam, we need some time of confirmation system, either third party (OpenID) or personal (email confirmation or registration).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ricky Buchanan</title>
		<link>http://www.doitmyselfblog.com/2009/are-negative-captchas-any-more-accessible/comment-page-1/#comment-327077</link>
		<dc:creator>Ricky Buchanan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Mar 2009 06:48:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.doitmyselfblog.com/2009/are-negative-captchas-any-more-accessible/#comment-327077</guid>
		<description>Personally, looking at that negative CAPTCHA example at the top of your article makes my head feel instantly migraine-ey. It&#039;s no easier to figure out the letters/numbers for me than it is with the distorted one or the weird-background ones.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Personally, looking at that negative CAPTCHA example at the top of your article makes my head feel instantly migraine-ey. It&#8217;s no easier to figure out the letters/numbers for me than it is with the distorted one or the weird-background ones.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

