Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | bryan_w's commentslogin

Let's play this out: how do you determine individual clients? By ip? By seasionid?

How do you "determine" individual clients to show them CAPTCHAs? Yes, you can, and probably should, make some use of IP addresses, although that would work better if idiots hadn't polluted the Internet with quite so much NAT.

But you don't have to, and you definitely don't have to completely rely on it. Look for a cookie. If you don't see it, route the client through a page that sets it.

Yes, this is subject to flooding attacks... in exactly the same way that every CAPTCHA system is subject to flooding attacks. But it actually uses fewer resources per request than showing the CAPTCHA would.


> How do you "determine" individual clients to show them CAPTCHAs?

Cookies.

> Yes, this is subject to flooding attacks

Err... Yeah exactly.

> in exactly the same way that every CAPTCHA system is subject to flooding attacks.

Uhm no the whole point of captchas is that it requires (or used to anyway) humans to solve them, thus limiting the rate to human speeds.


But that's not a specification

People on this site don't really think deeply about what they type. They just say whatever is the most cynical in order to farm up votes

> Children will just lie

Not if the parents are setting it up beforehand (like with small children) then their iaccount or Google account will be under parental controls from that point on.

It seems reasonable that if a parent enables their child to visit sites after that, then that's just their prerogative (like giving your kid beer)


I wonder who's in common there?

They obviously get the ideas from the same sources. Somewhere they don't invite ordinary people to like Davos or other conferences.

Could just be monkey see monkey do.

Then it is monkey see, monkey do the same/similar policies on smoking control, LEZ, digital ID, children's education, red meat and fish consumption, alcohol consumption, women's rights and a whole host of other things.

Some of these are good causes, some not so much. Some of them rely on an excluded middle.


Are you suggesting there's some shadowy cabal responsible for getting women the right to vote?

Erm, no I'm not. I'm pointing out the homogenisation of policies across multiple countries.

You should be well aware by this point in life that plenty of good causes are used to justify not so good things. Or to put it another way, "the road to hell is paved with good intentions".

On the most basic level, I could give the example of various children's charities being used to line the pockets of someone rather than doing what they are supposed to. That has happened a number of times.

In much the same way, we can see child safety and bullying (both of which are real issues) being used to excuse clamping down on freedom of expression online. A generation ago, the excuse of terrorism was used to remove civil liberties as well.

With women's rights, we see a genuine issue being abused. We see women from upper class or aristocratic backgrounds like Ursula von der Leyen getting jobs, while the bulk of women continue to work in grinding poverty, and can barely support themselves let alone a family. That is just the same old oligarchy and nepotism with a female face.


Sorry, I'm afraid I don't have a clue what point you're making, then, beyond "some things are bad."

You don’t need a formal conspiracy when interests converge.

At the same time? I don't think so. Almost everyone talks to each other and takes notes. We know they do. The World Economic Forum is real and has a website you can access. They talk about policies like this under their "Fourth Industrial Revolution" section and don't even hide it. The same policies are repeated across much of the world on everything from smoking to driving to digital ID, regardless of who gets voted in.

It’s the political equivalent of a TikTok trend.

You see others doing it and think it’s a good idea, so you do it too.


Not keeping the door open while grabbing luggage is NPC behavior no matter if it's waymo, Uber or a taxi.

The fact he mad this mistake, then went to the news media to broadcast his bad decision making is embarrassing.

I bet he finds himself the victim of bad situations all the time and doesn't know why


wow these shitty comments/people blaming the victim for not taking more precaution are everywhere

I'm pretty sure most people would see Toms point as valid?

If Bob made a huge deal about company's abuse of fluffy animal and never otherwise talked about fluffy animal, that would seen as inauthentic


That was created by AI. Ai is great at playing six degrees of Kevin Bacon

None of this is true. The fact that there are many, many companies out here today that are doing exactly what you are claiming for the non-CA age verification laws (like in TN and TX), yet you went down the conspiracy route for Meta and Google shows how much you are being played like a fiddle.

They can feed you an conspiracy and you'll eat it up because you were primed to have a cognitive bias, and will ignore the actual, real-world harms going on.

Rupert loves people like you


Enjoying a succulent meal, I guess

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: