Uh well actually-
(midwest.social)
Petersson
Science Memes(Actual capture. I failed to solve it.)
I would also be confused af. First, I would think it wants me to tap objects with a somewhat glossy surface, even though all of them actually reflect light. But having sorted the first trick in this question, I am now confronted with two other questions: is a body of water considered an "object"? Also, are those actually photos of a river or are they illustrations of a river? They don't look realistic to me... Because if they're illustrations then they wouldn't be particularly more reflective than anything else in this set of images
I hate these things
It looks like they have an AI generate all of the valid images.
They probably have a database of images and then come up with some BS prompt and having the AI generate the valid responses. But because everyone involved here seems to be an idiot, the prompts are stupid.
I feel like autism makes these impossible for me. I have to try several times every time.
Tap the objects which have little in the way of micro surface roughness and reflect light in a mostly specular fashion
there
I mean, they all reflect light because you can see them?
Trick question! They are all squares filled with pixels on a computer monitor, they emit light! The correct answer was "none of the above."
I've identified a bot account.
Trick trick question! Suppose I watched this on that one reflective LCD monitor with no backlight
Then all of the above would have been the correct answer.
But you didn't, did you? I can tell. You've got that "emissive display" vibe to you.
I see...
At this point, I'll just close the tab rather than bothering to deal with this bullshit.
Actually a science site I wanted to access.
Send the screenshot to support and call them posers
No science 4 u
Exactly. I loose interest and walk away.
Just don't use it too much and it tightens up again
Where's the Vantablack™ ?
What in the AI dystopian future kind of BS is that?
Also I hate to pick nits, but it's technically "CAPTCHA" and not "capture." It's supposed to be an acronym for Completely Automated Public Turing test to tell Computers and Humans Apart.
It is a screen capture of this ridiculous test though
I thought that these had been cracked by AI already so I'm not quite sure why we're even being presented with it.
To train AI to solve them
Nice try, BOT!
Tap objects that can experience true suffering.
Peewee, Chairry, Cowboy Curtis,
Chairry, Randy, Jambi
Human Fetus, Mr. Kite, Chairry
Tap objects that are currently being exposed to true suffering:
The wall behind you, the upper-left of your hair, the upper-right of your hair, The wall behind you
The wall behind you, the top-left of your head, the right of your head, The wall behind you
The wall behind you, the bottom-left of your head, the bottom-right of your head, The wall behind you
The desk you are on, your left arm on the table, your right arm below the desk, The desk you are on
You see, now they want to make sure you are dumber than the AI. You code as AI because you know too much.
Selecting all the water pics didn't solve it?
Not necessarily. hCaptcha is not very reliable in my experience. Sometimes it wants you to select multiple pictures but only shows one that matches the prompt. Or or gives you multiple matching images but still says you're wrong. Sometimes it tells you you passed but then doesn't bother setting the token correctly so you have to do it again. Of course all of these can combine until you solve variations of the same damn captcha thirty times in a row.
hCaptcha is such a horrible buggy mess that my base assumption is that I'll get trapped in an infinite loop anytime I see it.
Maybe (3,2) is wanting you to notice the sun in the picture - or is it the eye of horus?
Can the sun reflect light?
Hypothesising that it probably can, theoretically; do humans have any test / measurement apparatus that might empirically prove it against the background emissions?
Do we need to wait for a 'Disaster Area' concert?
sorry if this should be an NSQ, I 'm sure enough as I care that this is nothing to do with the botty-detector. But I am interested in whether anything strange happens with high(ish?) densities of light.
