G'day Neil,
Mark Gallagher wrote:
G'day Oskar,
BTW, if people use browser unable to display images, how much would an audio captcha really help (I mean, sound's way more hi-tech)?
Some people use browsers that cannot display images because they're blind. In such cases, audio is a Good Thing, and use of images specifically designed to be unreadable to computers is not.
An E-mail request link is pretty effective, I think. It is reasonable to assume that anyone who is intending to edit Wikipedia has some way of reading and writing text, whether directly or via assistive technology, and this will accommodate everyone who has them, without being bot-friendly.
Ahh, but we don't require email addresses to sign up to Wikipedia. This will be a new requirement, and will undoubtedly result in much squawking along the same lines as "need to register to create an article" did. I won't bore anyone with the arguments of why some people won't be willing to cough up an email address over the Internet, or why these people shouldn't be treated as irritants ...
Also, a secure but accessible sound captcha is rather more difficult to pull off than a visual captcha, since there are many more people in the world with partial hearing than partial sight.
Absolutely. I'm not arguing that a sound-based captcha (or an email rego, or whatever) is the way to go, either: I think putting all our eggs in one basket is a mistake. There's only one solution that will please everyone and, alas, that one pleases the bots, too. As such, an image-based captcha, along with other options for the eventuality of those people who can't view images (preferably provided without abusing said people), is presumably the way to go. Developers willing, o' course.
-- Mark Gallagher "What? I can't hear you, I've got a banana on my head!" - Danger Mouse