704
submitted 1 week ago by mox@lemmy.sdf.org to c/news@lemmy.world

Not just tracking cookies, but browser fingerprinting.

Not just Google, but now Cloudflare.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] meowmeowbeanz@sh.itjust.works 113 points 1 week ago

Exactly. We’re all out here licking corporate boots by clicking traffic lights for free, propping up their data plantations under the guise of “security.” Google turned paranoia into profit, and now Cloudflare’s farming our fingerprints like we’re glorified dairy cows.

That $3 settlement? Peanuts to keep us complacent while they mint billions off our collective unpaid labor. The real CAPTCHA is figuring out how to burn this extractive circus to the ground before we’re all indentured to their algorithmic overlords.

[-] Xanthobilly@lemmy.world 42 points 1 week ago

It starts with striking till Musk is out of government, otherwise:

[-] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago

If standing around doesn't make him stop we have to be prepared to do the things we all know are required to stop fascists.

[-] Sparky 83 points 1 week ago

I love how it has taken this long for media to cover this issue. I thought this was common knowledge for about a decade

[-] blakenong@lemmings.world 17 points 1 week ago

I stopped having any faith in google when Gmail came out and I noticed ads related to the content of my email. It would be naive to think that data usage was limited to showing targeted ads.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 55 points 1 week ago

I had to go through seven captcha screens a couple of days ago just to apply for a fucking job.

If I wasn't so desperate for work, I would have said fuck it. I hate it.

[-] amon@lemmy.world 23 points 1 week ago

It's the first qualification you need to have

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 19 points 1 week ago

I guess so, but I was starting to think maybe I was a robot after about the fourth.

[-] TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world 43 points 1 week ago

You know, I think the best way for the Internet as a whole to stop using people as product, is to have a worldwide publically subsidised Internet, like the BBC or PBS but it is the Internet. The governments pitches in just like with any global programmes.

[-] _stranger_@lemmy.world 28 points 1 week ago

People buy magnets and tape them to their body because they think it cures cancer.

Why would these people use free Internet when premium luxury deluxe Internet is available for only .99¢ a month.

And then why wouldn't PLDI, Inc founder not use his influence to get elected president and kill that bad public Internet.

[-] piecat@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago

Worse than magnets, "negative ion" wearables are strong radioactive aources

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Tja@programming.dev 8 points 1 week ago

That would be awesome but I don't see it working in practice. The BBC at least is losing it's independence, I don't know about PBS. Imagine Trump now controlling the internet directly for 4 years.

[-] monotremata@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 week ago

Musk, Zuckerberg, Bezos, and Pichai were all sitting behind him at his inauguration.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] avattar@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 1 week ago

I already pay for internet access. I think most people do. Use that money.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] YungOnions@lemmy.world 37 points 1 week ago
[-] bassomitron@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago

Reviews on the Firefox one says it requires you to download and install another app for it to work. Screw that nonsense.

[-] LiveLM@lemmy.zip 8 points 1 week ago

The success rate of the extension can be improved by simulating user interactions with the help of a client app.

It's optional

[-] DoucheBagMcSwag@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Holy shit I'm trying this

Edit: it works.

[-] HellsBelle@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 week ago

I wish they had mobile versions. :/

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] nutsack@lemmy.dbzer0.com 33 points 1 week ago

The shit has absolutely destroyed the internet. they only keep getting worse, taking more time and making me feel more stupid. there is no God.

[-] Hobbes_Dent@lemmy.world 32 points 1 week ago

Click the squares with your freedom in them:

[-] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 31 points 1 week ago

The details are horrific:

  • 819 million hours spent solving CAPTCHAs.
  • $6.1 billion worth of our time at the US federal minimum wage.
  • 134 Petabytes of internet bandwidth.
  • consuming 7.5 million kWhs of energy.
  • which produced 7.5 million pounds of CO2 pollution.
  • This one's from the author of the article: putting the 819 million hours against the average human lifespan of 79 years, that's 1,182.7 lifetimes spent solving CAPTCHAs.
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] pixxelkick@lemmy.world 29 points 1 week ago

It's a free service that's been provided to website makers to easily add a way to reduce bot spam. And for a very long time, it worked

Captcha got tonnes of free training data, and in return website maintainer got an incredibly handy free tool to help secure their site.

Captcha 100% could have charged licensing for their tool, could charged money for developers to use their service.

They didn't, and I think it's perfectly reasonable they got the training data as "payment" instead.

Your favorite free websites you use get to have another part of their architecture stay free.

The website maintainer get an awesome free tool.

Captcha got training data to profit off of.

That's good internet where everyone wins without the need for bullshit licensing and fees and royalties and subscriptions.

Would you have rather your Netflix account cost an extra 15 cents per month or whatever to offset yet another licensing cost for some captcha tool?

[-] mox@lemmy.sdf.org 9 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

CAPTCHAs make web sites awful to use, and waste the limited lifespans of billions of people.

There are other ways to manage bots.

[-] pixxelkick@lemmy.world 18 points 1 week ago

Not easily, and not at the time, no, it really was a very easy way to quickly reduce bot problems at the time.

You'd get random spam for stuff that could flood your forums or etc, and setting up captcha had an extremely immediate and palpable effect on reducing the spam that came in from random bot farms and shit.

I can personally confirm that when I implemented captcha on my forums i maintained 14 years ago, it pretty substantially reduced spammers by a huge degree.

[-] mox@lemmy.sdf.org 14 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

There's no point in arguing what once was. Things have changed. CAPTCHAs are now less effective, far more invasive, and for many people, far more troublesome.

Cling to them if you like. I no longer use them on any of my sites, because I care about my users.

[-] echolalia@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 week ago

I'm not a website administrator so I'm out of the loop. Other ways to manage bots? Like what?

[-] mox@lemmy.sdf.org 20 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

What will be effective depends on the nature of the site and that of the bots causing trouble. For example, a forum can limit posting privileges until an account builds a reputation, a paid goods/services site can restrict access until a purchase is made, a web service can use revocable credentials, and a data download site can use rate limits. (That last one is actually useful in a variety of situations, and can be done at the network level instead of or in addition to the application level.)

There is no silver bullet, but there are lots of small measures that can be very effective when applied thoughtfully, without turning a site into a frustrating-to-use surveillance tool for Google at the expense of the humans who want to or have to use it.

Even a small, locally hosted, activate-only-once, simple image or text-based CAPTCHA would be preferable to the ones operated by third parties.

[-] echolalia@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 week ago

Thank you for the thorough reply!

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] xektop@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Captcha was never good at stopping bots. It was always used to identify who is a human. In other words exactly the opposite of what you think.

Edit: because I see confusion, maybe a language barrier, here is an example of what people think it is and how it works: https://youtube.com/shorts/rme6PT7-CRI Which is wrong on many levels.

Here is a better explanation of what I meant: https://youtu.be/VTsBP21-XpI

Hope this explains it better than my original comment.

[-] pixxelkick@lemmy.world 24 points 1 week ago

I can personally confirm it very much did help curb botting issues on my website.

[-] taiyang@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago

Seconded, websites with logins are practically unusable without the tool. We had to disable it once and our database got flooded by unverified accounts. Absolutely awful.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] naught101@lemmy.world 28 points 1 week ago

Really? 100 hours on average for each person on the globe, including babies, the elderly, and those in extreme poverty? That seems like a lot

[-] BlueMagma@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 week ago

Ridiculous, this number is clearly fake. Not saying that the highlighted subject is not an issue, it really is, but why lie about the number ? I'm sure the real number is impressive enough

[-] naught101@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago

I guess I do one or two a day on average, say 500 a year. At 5 seconds each, thats about 42 mins a year. I'm a fairly heavy user too. Recaptcha has been round for what, 15-20 years? So that's like 15 hours total at a rough guess..

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] ThoranTW@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago

It's over a 13 year period:

The researchers took the average completion time of 3.53 seconds across both image and behavior CAPTCHAs and multiplied that against a low-end estimate of 512 billion v1 and v2 reCAPTCHAs completed across the internet between 2010 and 2023, resulting in the following estimations of their impact on our lives:

It ends up being like, .175 seconds per day for the average internet user after some rough estimates

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] ddash@lemmy.dbzer0.com 25 points 1 week ago

I always click wrong stuff first to see which captcha is training on my input and which one is actually checking what I click.

[-] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago

how do you tell by doing that?

[-] dan69@lemmy.world 18 points 1 week ago

I got my compensation money from a different lawsuit, it was totally worth the ~$3usd

[-] taiyang@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago

Hey at least you bought the lawyers in charge another summer home.

[-] teije9 7 points 1 week ago

yeah, clicking on the checkmark means you are giving them permission to view info about your browser history, and what you did on those sites.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] w3dd1e@lemm.ee 5 points 1 week ago

I knew it was training LLMs. I had a just had a feeling that it was, not any specific evidence. I hate being right all the time. -_-

[-] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 12 points 1 week ago

Not LLMs, self-driving cars. Ever noticed how most of the challenges are things you need to recognize while driving?

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] catloaf@lemm.ee 5 points 1 week ago

Feeling? Google literally states this is one of their goals:

Every time our CAPTCHAs are solved, that human effort helps digitize text, annotate images, and build machine learning datasets. This in turn helps preserve books, improve maps, and solve hard AI problems.

https://www.google.com/recaptcha/intro/?hl=es%2Findex.html

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 09 Feb 2025
704 points (100.0% liked)

News

25226 readers
3802 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS