On Fri, 2008-08-29 at 23:05 -0400, Eric Gorr wrote: > On Aug 29, 2008, at 9:40 PM, Robert Cummings wrote: > > > On Fri, 2008-08-29 at 17:28 -0400, Eric Gorr wrote: > >> On Aug 29, 2008, at 5:19 PM, Robert Cummings wrote: > >> > >>> On Fri, 2008-08-29 at 16:54 -0400, Eric Gorr wrote: > >>>> On Aug 29, 2008, at 4:42 PM, Robert Cummings wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> On Fri, 2008-08-29 at 16:21 -0400, Eric Gorr wrote: > >>>>>> On Aug 29, 2008, at 4:09 PM, Robert Cummings wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Fri, 2008-08-29 at 15:52 -0400, Eric Gorr wrote: > >>>>>>>> On Aug 29, 2008, at 3:41 PM, Stut wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> I completely agree, but as far as I know it's only (and I use > >>>>>>>>> that > >>>>>>>>> word carefully) people with both visual and audio impairments > >>>>>>>>> that > >>>>>>>>> you cannot cater for. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I cannot see any reason why a person with both visual and audio > >>>>>>>> impairments could not be presented with a test to prove they > >>>>>>>> are > >>>>>>>> human. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Go on, I'm all eyes and ears... describe such a test. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captcha#Attempts_at_more_accessible_CAPTCHAs > >>>>>> discusses this. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> And, I look forward to see what those doing research in this area > >>>>>> come > >>>>>> up with in the future. It does seem obvious that since they are > >>>>>> human, > >>>>>> that a good test can be designed which does not rely on security > >>>>>> through obscurity. > >>>>> > >>>>> I said describe such a test... I didn't say describe current > >>>>> thoughts > >>>>> about such a test that have no practical implementation. > >>>> > >>>> I pointed to such tests. > >>>> > >>>>> Pay special attention to the word "practical" used above before > >>>>> shooting > >>>>> something back off the top of your head. > >>>> > >>>> Of course they have a practical implementation. They have been > >>>> implemented. > >>> > >>> Implementation does not imply practicallity. > >>> > >>> Implementations for space travel exist. Does it make space travel > >>> for > >>> everyone practical? > >>> > >>> Now please return to paying special attention to the word practical. > >>> Feel free to dust off a dictionary if you must. > >> > >> What is impractical about about an implementation asking a question > >> such as: > >> > >> what is 3 + 5? > >> what color is the sky? > >> > >> and then processing the answer entered? > > > > The answer lies in the very article to which you referred me. These > > are > > easily crackable, and thus impractical. > > By that illogical conclusion, all captcha's are impractical for all > are easily crackable and yet they have the very practical ability to > prevent an amount of spam that is quite beyond comprehension. > > Care to try again? All CAPTCHA's are not easily crackable. Some are quite difficult. It's quite likely that all are crackable, but the same can be said for any encryption scheme too. Practicality brings into play such high minded concepts as time, space, and cost. I just noticed btw that you've taken this off list. Please keep it on the list for all to read. If you want private lessons I can be reached for pricing at this address. Cheers, Rob. -- http://www.interjinn.com Application and Templating Framework for PHP -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
