<?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: Fight Spam with Re-Captcha. And Digitize Books.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.tiptrickmod.com/web/fight-spam-with-re-captcha-and-digitize-books/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.tiptrickmod.com/web/fight-spam-with-re-captcha-and-digitize-books/</link>
	<description>Because life's about the customization...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 14 Mar 2010 09:33:09 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Ryan</title>
		<link>http://www.tiptrickmod.com/web/fight-spam-with-re-captcha-and-digitize-books/#comment-46</link>
		<dc:creator>Ryan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 May 2008 10:15:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tiptrickmod.com/?p=97#comment-46</guid>
		<description>Seems like a lot of effort to go to for hiding your e-mail - I think there are encryption scripts that make it a little bit more fluid but still stop bots from grabbing it.

I&#039;ve used the ReCaptcha plugin on a few sites now and generally it&#039;s not bad. However, captcha&#039;s are one of the easiest systems to beat for spambots, so not sure how effective it is, or will be as bots mature.

The digitizing books thing is intriguing. I tried to figure out what effect the average ReCaptcha user has on the process, but couldn&#039;t piece it together from the paragraph you quoted. So, for anyone else that&#039;s curious - here&#039;s &lt;a href=&quot;http://recaptcha.net/learnmore.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;more info&lt;/a&gt;:

&lt;blockquote&gt;To archive human knowledge and to make information more accessible to the world, multiple projects are currently digitizing physical books that were written before the computer age. The book pages are being photographically scanned, and then, to make them searchable, transformed into text using &quot;Optical Character Recognition&quot; (OCR). The transformation into text is useful because scanning a book produces images, which are difficult to store on small devices, expensive to download, and cannot be searched. The problem is that OCR is not perfect.

 reCAPTCHA improves the process of digitizing books by sending words that cannot be read by computers to the Web in the form of CAPTCHAs for humans to decipher. More specifically, each word that cannot be read correctly by OCR is placed on an image and used as a CAPTCHA. This is possible because most OCR programs alert you when a word cannot be read correctly.

But if a computer can&#039;t read such a CAPTCHA, how does the system know the correct answer to the puzzle? Here&#039;s how: Each new word that cannot be read correctly by OCR is given to a user in conjunction with another word for which the answer is already known. The user is then asked to read both words. If they solve the one for which the answer is known, the system assumes their answer is correct for the new one. The system then gives the new image to a number of other people to determine, with higher confidence, whether the original answer was correct. &lt;/blockquote&gt;

Neat stuff!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Seems like a lot of effort to go to for hiding your e-mail &#8211; I think there are encryption scripts that make it a little bit more fluid but still stop bots from grabbing it.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve used the ReCaptcha plugin on a few sites now and generally it&#8217;s not bad. However, captcha&#8217;s are one of the easiest systems to beat for spambots, so not sure how effective it is, or will be as bots mature.</p>
<p>The digitizing books thing is intriguing. I tried to figure out what effect the average ReCaptcha user has on the process, but couldn&#8217;t piece it together from the paragraph you quoted. So, for anyone else that&#8217;s curious &#8211; here&#8217;s <a href="http://recaptcha.net/learnmore.html" rel="nofollow">more info</a>:</p>
<blockquote><p>To archive human knowledge and to make information more accessible to the world, multiple projects are currently digitizing physical books that were written before the computer age. The book pages are being photographically scanned, and then, to make them searchable, transformed into text using &#8220;Optical Character Recognition&#8221; (OCR). The transformation into text is useful because scanning a book produces images, which are difficult to store on small devices, expensive to download, and cannot be searched. The problem is that OCR is not perfect.</p>
<p> reCAPTCHA improves the process of digitizing books by sending words that cannot be read by computers to the Web in the form of CAPTCHAs for humans to decipher. More specifically, each word that cannot be read correctly by OCR is placed on an image and used as a CAPTCHA. This is possible because most OCR programs alert you when a word cannot be read correctly.</p>
<p>But if a computer can&#8217;t read such a CAPTCHA, how does the system know the correct answer to the puzzle? Here&#8217;s how: Each new word that cannot be read correctly by OCR is given to a user in conjunction with another word for which the answer is already known. The user is then asked to read both words. If they solve the one for which the answer is known, the system assumes their answer is correct for the new one. The system then gives the new image to a number of other people to determine, with higher confidence, whether the original answer was correct. </p></blockquote>
<p>Neat stuff!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
