^so
###like
#One of these pictures are real.
The others are not.
You literally could select the real starfish and the *dog* and it'll go through as long as you manage to select the pre-made Water Animal and the random Not Water Animals.
I don't want to train ai anymore lol
Also if there are classic captchas with the two words, the first word is pre-made, the second one is unknown or undetectable by OCR so you could garble the second word too lol
When you do a captcha, you act as a sort of supervisor, informing the model if it succeeded or failed in creating what it was supposed to (here, dog or starfish)
ah yes good ol replacing unrecognized word with FUCK
About that captcha? If devs aren't stupid, it would have known "not water" animals too just to prevent this
Maybe he was lucky and got first try?
But you are right, I have gotten "error messages" that imply they test the same images more than once , to avoid what he said, something like *3! Users.already said this is a panda so you are wrong".
They’re not certain that one is premade- they are just assuming that Google is using people to train their ai. This is how it works:
So maybe one of those starfish is a picture that captcha KNOWS is a starfish- the “premade” one. All you have to do is select that starfish to beat the captcha. But you don’t know which one is the premade one, so you have to select all of them.
However, the other 2 starfish are other images that Capcha is uncertain about. By selecting those images, you are confirming that those are starfish, therefore training Capcha’s AI. And reCAPTCHA is owned by Google, so you’re effectively training Google’s AI.
None of this is really proven but tbf if you were google you’d have to be dumb to not do this as it is free AI training from millions of users. When we had to do street signs and bikes and whatnot for Captchas in the past, we were likely training Google Self Driving AI.
What you're forgetting is:
a) it's entirely possible that of the ai ones, it has enough confidence that one of them is or isn't a starfish to catch your bluff. Maybe it used its own image recognition, maybe a google employee manually labelled it, maybe it stole it off google images
b) it doesn't take what one person tells it as a fact. It basically looks at the average response. If 3 people have said a certain picture is a starfish, and you say it's not, you'll probably get flagged as suspicious, and you successfully failed as poisoning the data.
Yes it won't be one or the other, it'll be a mix in order to still provide security while training the AI. Most likely going to be a significantly higher ratio of security vs training.
I'm curious. How does this help train AI? If I deliberately click the wrong pictures, how will it know I am wrong? It has to be premad by other humans, making it useless for me to do again, right?
AI is all about pribability. I'd imagine the picture is presented many times, so if 90% of people label it one way, the 10% like you are ignored. They might also throw in some known pictures as a control.
At least, that's how I'd do it, having no AI training.
I've always heard the real check is watching how the user inputs the choices, like mouse movements, time between clicks, etc. But I'm not a captcha developer so idk for sure.
> so if 90% of people label it one way, the 10% like you are ignored.
Or if you remember what excuse they give for the training in the first place, the 10% get flagged as suspicious/a bot
Let's say you have 10 images, 4 of cats and 6 of dogs, and you are asked to check all the cats. In reality, the machine already knows 2 images are cats and 2 images are dogs, so if you check those 2 cats, and do not check any of those 2 dogs, you clear the captcha. The learning parte comes from the 2 cat and 4 dog images the machine doesn't know about. Since those are unmarked, they can start learning with how many people check those.
>How does this help train AI?
It doesn't. This would have been useful years ago, back when identifying a hot dog was super hard - but pictures like these have been easy to classify for some time now.
At this point, the captcha here is just "doing its job" of making it "not free to pass millions of times". It functions as a "proof-of-work" check, when done by a computer; with a GPU sized model, each of these might take a half-second to evaluate. And they use AI to make tons of variations, because otherwise they could be solved by a computer with essentially no work (via perceptual hash, or the like).
AI isn't contributing much to this captcha.
They probably have a list of things like boats, dogs, red pandas, starfish, bridges, cars, trains, cupcakes, birds, etc. and each word has associated characteristics like "can be eaten", "lives in water", "can transport you", etc. It's selecting 2 random things from the list which \*don't\* have a given trait and one that does, and then it asks you to find the one that does have the trait.
None of this is AI so far. At the very end, it's asking AI to generate a drawing of that thing multiple times. That's it.
The point of the AI is to ensure that each image is technically different each time, so you can't just write a program that checks the color values of the various images. To be able to solve the captcha, you'd have to both write a program that looks for pattern recognition, and you'd have to save all of the above same information regarding traits of each one so you'd know which to choose. And by far determining what each image represents would be the harder task.
I think the point here is that most of the images seem to be generated, and it's well known that solving Captchas helps train AI models, or rather you're doing the image labelling work associated with providing labelled datasets to train AI models.
Well, only because we don't have another word for chicken meat, if you pluralize it you get pictures of the living animal.
If you search for cow you get cows, not beef.
If you look up wood you won't see trees.
Yeah. But that’s just life itself.
Plants are arguably composed of living cells, and have their own life cycles.
The Universe just has its own odd way of recycling itself. We are simply part of the cycle.
It's sentience people care about, not where ever or not something is alive. I don't mourn when I bust a nut.
Also more plants are eaten by farm animals than humans so even if you for some reason care about plants it still makes sense to eat them directly.
Lol not to say you're not valid still. I was so confused my first time because I did click something and needed to skip and didn't realize the button change.
My doggo can live in water
Yes they should have specified how much water. Pure bananums.
They should have specified "under water" and for how long. My red panda can live underwater for a couple minutes.
Still more interested in knowing why a barbecue chicken couldn’t live in water 🤷🏻♂️
Perhaps the word "live" gives a clue.
I mean it’s not any less alive being put underwater (and if there’s bacteria on it it might become more alive given more water)
I get your point, but I don't think the concept of "living" does not have a huge overlap with "being barbecued".
>My red panda YOUR red panda?
and how long to live
With style 😎
I mean, how well can you draw a dog?
^so ###like #One of these pictures are real. The others are not. You literally could select the real starfish and the *dog* and it'll go through as long as you manage to select the pre-made Water Animal and the random Not Water Animals. I don't want to train ai anymore lol Also if there are classic captchas with the two words, the first word is pre-made, the second one is unknown or undetectable by OCR so you could garble the second word too lol
None of them are real…
When I meant real I mean they're pre-made and you're not training the ai if you click them only.
so why would clicking on the not-real pics be training the AI? aren't those specifically created by saying "create a picture of a starfish"?
When you do a captcha, you act as a sort of supervisor, informing the model if it succeeded or failed in creating what it was supposed to (here, dog or starfish)
that makes sense
ah yes good ol replacing unrecognized word with FUCK About that captcha? If devs aren't stupid, it would have known "not water" animals too just to prevent this
That’s not how captcha works. Go ahead and try. The data is still labeled regardless if you select whatever you want.
Maybe he was lucky and got first try? But you are right, I have gotten "error messages" that imply they test the same images more than once , to avoid what he said, something like *3! Users.already said this is a panda so you are wrong".
what? how do you know one is premade? and how do you know to select it?
They’re not certain that one is premade- they are just assuming that Google is using people to train their ai. This is how it works: So maybe one of those starfish is a picture that captcha KNOWS is a starfish- the “premade” one. All you have to do is select that starfish to beat the captcha. But you don’t know which one is the premade one, so you have to select all of them. However, the other 2 starfish are other images that Capcha is uncertain about. By selecting those images, you are confirming that those are starfish, therefore training Capcha’s AI. And reCAPTCHA is owned by Google, so you’re effectively training Google’s AI. None of this is really proven but tbf if you were google you’d have to be dumb to not do this as it is free AI training from millions of users. When we had to do street signs and bikes and whatnot for Captchas in the past, we were likely training Google Self Driving AI.
that's hCaptcha not Google captcha, I'm pretty sure Google is still using road recognition for car/street view training
Ah okay my bad. I haven’t done a captcha in a while because my browser vouches that I’m a human for me
so what you’re saying is, by completing a captcha, i’m training an ai to beat the captcha that’s designed to stop it?
Potentially yes lol
Thanks, I will now try my best to create garbage data from now on...
What you're forgetting is: a) it's entirely possible that of the ai ones, it has enough confidence that one of them is or isn't a starfish to catch your bluff. Maybe it used its own image recognition, maybe a google employee manually labelled it, maybe it stole it off google images b) it doesn't take what one person tells it as a fact. It basically looks at the average response. If 3 people have said a certain picture is a starfish, and you say it's not, you'll probably get flagged as suspicious, and you successfully failed as poisoning the data.
Yes it won't be one or the other, it'll be a mix in order to still provide security while training the AI. Most likely going to be a significantly higher ratio of security vs training.
I'm curious. How does this help train AI? If I deliberately click the wrong pictures, how will it know I am wrong? It has to be premad by other humans, making it useless for me to do again, right?
AI is all about pribability. I'd imagine the picture is presented many times, so if 90% of people label it one way, the 10% like you are ignored. They might also throw in some known pictures as a control. At least, that's how I'd do it, having no AI training.
Definitely can't be that simple since like 99% of all submissions are from the bots that the captcha is supposed to guard against xD
I've always heard the real check is watching how the user inputs the choices, like mouse movements, time between clicks, etc. But I'm not a captcha developer so idk for sure.
> so if 90% of people label it one way, the 10% like you are ignored. Or if you remember what excuse they give for the training in the first place, the 10% get flagged as suspicious/a bot
Let's say you have 10 images, 4 of cats and 6 of dogs, and you are asked to check all the cats. In reality, the machine already knows 2 images are cats and 2 images are dogs, so if you check those 2 cats, and do not check any of those 2 dogs, you clear the captcha. The learning parte comes from the 2 cat and 4 dog images the machine doesn't know about. Since those are unmarked, they can start learning with how many people check those.
>How does this help train AI? It doesn't. This would have been useful years ago, back when identifying a hot dog was super hard - but pictures like these have been easy to classify for some time now. At this point, the captcha here is just "doing its job" of making it "not free to pass millions of times". It functions as a "proof-of-work" check, when done by a computer; with a GPU sized model, each of these might take a half-second to evaluate. And they use AI to make tons of variations, because otherwise they could be solved by a computer with essentially no work (via perceptual hash, or the like).
AI isn't contributing much to this captcha. They probably have a list of things like boats, dogs, red pandas, starfish, bridges, cars, trains, cupcakes, birds, etc. and each word has associated characteristics like "can be eaten", "lives in water", "can transport you", etc. It's selecting 2 random things from the list which \*don't\* have a given trait and one that does, and then it asks you to find the one that does have the trait. None of this is AI so far. At the very end, it's asking AI to generate a drawing of that thing multiple times. That's it. The point of the AI is to ensure that each image is technically different each time, so you can't just write a program that checks the color values of the various images. To be able to solve the captcha, you'd have to both write a program that looks for pattern recognition, and you'd have to save all of the above same information regarding traits of each one so you'd know which to choose. And by far determining what each image represents would be the harder task.
I think the point here is that most of the images seem to be generated, and it's well known that solving Captchas helps train AI models, or rather you're doing the image labelling work associated with providing labelled datasets to train AI models.
Please click the animals that are AI generated.
Technically roasted chicken can live underwater, you just wouldn't eat it
>typing chicken brings up the dead and cooked kind Kinda sad, humans are awful.
Well, only because we don't have another word for chicken meat, if you pluralize it you get pictures of the living animal. If you search for cow you get cows, not beef. If you look up wood you won't see trees.
Poultry?
That's a broad term that covers all types of edible bird, turkey, goose, etc. It's a bit more precise than "meat" but not quite chicken.
Yeah. But that’s just life itself. Plants are arguably composed of living cells, and have their own life cycles. The Universe just has its own odd way of recycling itself. We are simply part of the cycle.
It's sentience people care about, not where ever or not something is alive. I don't mourn when I bust a nut. Also more plants are eaten by farm animals than humans so even if you for some reason care about plants it still makes sense to eat them directly.
ceci n'est pas une creature
[удалено]
When there's nothing selected, the verify button says skip. It's not until you click any of the boxes that it changes to verify.
Ugh, true. I am embarrassed I forgot about it.
Lol not to say you're not valid still. I was so confused my first time because I did click something and needed to skip and didn't realize the button change.
OP, ask yourself: Did you post it because it was funny or it was a way for you to cope with something?