News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Introducing the Invisible reCAPTCHA. Parent comment

Re:Introducing the Invisible reCAPTCHA by arjie on Thursday March 09, 2017 @06:35AM (#13828610)
What would it be? It's not clear to me.

Going from throwing away the work to improving Google's image recognition is a Pareto improvement so I'm interested in the justification.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Introducing the Invisible reCAPTCHA by Freak_NL on Thursday March 09, 2017 @07:55AM (#13828912)
But to me this is not a Pareto improvement (i.e., this is subjective). I consider the bolstering of the hold Google (and Apple, and Amazon, and Microsoft) has over a number of common domains (and in a broader sense our lives) to be undesirable and unethical. So when I correctly teach Google's proprietary image recognition software what a traffic sign, mountain, store front (ugh, these are the worst), or tree is, I am (even in the strict economic sense of a Pareto improvement) harming myself.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Introducing the Invisible reCAPTCHA by arjie on Thursday March 09, 2017 @08:50AM (#13829183)
Ah. All Right. Thanks.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Introducing the Invisible reCAPTCHA by yjftsjthsd-h on Thursday March 09, 2017 @07:40AM (#13828845)
Not everyone is using the same ethical model as you?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Introducing the Invisible reCAPTCHA by arjie on Thursday March 09, 2017 @08:49AM (#13829178)
Probably. If they were why would I ask them to justify their position? It would trivially correspond with mine.
[ Parent | on HN ]