A recent study reveals that CAPTCHAs are essentially a profitable tracking system disguised as a security measure. While ostensibly designed to differentiate bots from humans, CAPTCHAs allow companies like Google to collect vast amounts of user data for targeted advertising and other purposes. This system has cost users a staggering amount of time—an estimated 819 billion hours globally—and has generated nearly $1 trillion in revenue, primarily for Google. The study argues that the actual security benefits of CAPTCHAs are minimal compared to the immense profits generated from the user data they collect. This raises concerns about the balance between online security and user privacy, suggesting CAPTCHAs function more as a data harvesting tool than an effective bot deterrent.
Tim investigated the precision of location data used for targeted advertising by requesting his own data from ad networks. He found that location information shared with these networks, often through apps on his phone, was remarkably precise, pinpointing his location to within a few meters. He successfully identified his own apartment and even specific rooms within it based on the location polygons provided by the ad networks. This highlighted the potential privacy implications of sharing location data with apps, demonstrating how easily and accurately individuals can be tracked even without explicit consent for precise location sharing. The experiment revealed a lack of transparency and control over how this granular location data is collected, used, and shared by advertising ecosystems.
HN commenters generally agreed with the article's premise that location tracking through in-app advertising is pervasive and concerning. Some highlighted the irony of privacy policies that claim not to share precise location while effectively doing so through ad requests containing latitude/longitude. Several discussed technical details, including the surprising precision achievable even without GPS and the potential misuse of background location data. Others pointed to the broader ecosystem issue, emphasizing the difficulty in assigning blame to any single actor and the collective responsibility of ad networks, app developers, and device manufacturers. A few commenters suggested potential mitigations like VPNs or disabling location services entirely, while others expressed resignation to the current state of surveillance. The effectiveness of "Limit Ad Tracking" settings was also questioned.
Summary of Comments ( 70 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43002440
Hacker News users generally agree with the premise that CAPTCHAs are exploitative. Several point out the irony of Google using them for training AI while simultaneously claiming they prevent bots. Some highlight the accessibility issues CAPTCHAs create, particularly for disabled users. Others discuss alternatives, such as Cloudflare's Turnstile, and the privacy implications of different solutions. The increasing difficulty and frequency of CAPTCHAs are also criticized, with some speculating it's a deliberate tactic to push users towards paid "captcha-free" services. Several commenters express frustration with the current state of CAPTCHAs and the lack of viable alternatives.
The Hacker News post discussing the PC Gamer article about CAPTCHAs being a "tracking cookie farm" has a moderate number of comments, exploring different facets of the issue. Several commenters express skepticism about the primary claim, questioning the methodology of the study and how the supposed $1 trillion figure was derived. They point out that Google doesn't directly charge for reCAPTCHA and that the benefit to Google is primarily in improving its own services, like Maps and self-driving cars.
Some users discuss the alternatives to CAPTCHAs, acknowledging their imperfections while also recognizing the need for some form of bot mitigation. Privacy-preserving alternatives like Privacy Pass are mentioned, but their limitations and potential vulnerabilities are also brought up. The trade-off between user privacy and website security is a recurring theme.
A few commenters delve into the technical aspects of CAPTCHAs, explaining how they work and how the data collected can be used for purposes beyond simple bot detection. They discuss the use of CAPTCHA data for training machine learning models and improving accessibility features.
Several users share anecdotal experiences with CAPTCHAs, ranging from frustration with their difficulty to concerns about accessibility for visually impaired users. The effectiveness of CAPTCHAs in preventing bot activity is also debated, with some users suggesting that they are easily bypassed by sophisticated bots.
While the initial premise of the linked article about CAPTCHAs being primarily a profit-driven scheme is met with skepticism, the comments generally acknowledge the privacy implications and the potential for misuse of the collected data. The discussion highlights the complex balancing act between security, user experience, and privacy in the online world. There's no overwhelming consensus, but rather a nuanced conversation exploring the various perspectives on the issue.