You need to show that you are not a robot

Fortunati, Leopoldina; Manganelli, Anna Maria; Cavallo, Filippo; Honsell, Furio

doi:10.1177/1461444819831971

Cited by 12 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 36 publications

(37 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the responses discussed here place the flaws of people, at least partly, within a task-or work-based context. Critical theorists of technology have argued that within a capitalist society, the development of performance standards around the capabilities of machines, such as efficiency, would result in people being viewed as inherently less than machines (e.g., Noble, 2011), an argument extended now to the ways in which people have to routinely verify their humanity (Fortunati et al, 2019). Such a judgment is outside the scope of this study but is a potential area for continued research.…”

Section: Origin Of Beingmentioning

confidence: 95%

Ontological Boundaries between Humans and Computers and the Implications for Human-Machine Communication

Guzman

2020

HMC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In human-machine communication, people interact with a communication partner that is of a different ontological nature from themselves. This study examines how people conceptualize ontological differences between humans and computers and the implications of these differences for human-machine communication. Findings based on data from qualitative interviews with 73 U.S. adults regarding disembodied artificial intelligence (AI) technologies (voice-based AI assistants, automated-writing software) show that people differentiate between humans and computers based on origin of being, degree of autonomy, status as tool/tool-user, level of intelligence, emotional capabilities, and inherent flaws. In addition, these ontological boundaries are becoming increasingly blurred as technologies emulate more human-like qualities, such as emotion. This study also demonstrates how people’s conceptualizations of the human-computer divide inform aspects of their interactions with communicative technologies.

show abstract

Section: Origin Of Beingmentioning

confidence: 95%

Ontological Boundaries between Humans and Computers and the Implications for Human-Machine Communication

Guzman

2020

HMC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…reCAPTCHAs are somewhat different, in that they are not necessarily pleasurable to solve; in fact minimizing user frustration and the time required to solve the challenge are typical goals in CAPTCHA development (Fortunati et al, 2019(Fortunati et al, : 1861Lazar et al, 2012Lazar et al, : 2268. However, scholars have drawn on algorithmic game theory to note that there remains a motivational component to reCAPTCHAs; users want to interact with a site, and they are required to solve the challenge in order to do so (Farenzena et al, 2016;Mühlhoff, 2020).…”

Section: Captchas As Digital Labormentioning

confidence: 99%

reCAPTCHA Challenges and the Production of the Ideal Web User

Pettis¹

2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The CAPTCHA (Completely Automated Turing test to tell Computers and Humans Apart) is found throughout many websites. By challenging users to read a line of scrambled letters, identify crosswalks in an image, or some complete another task that is difficult for a computer to do, but comparatively trivial for a human user, a CAPTCHA verifies that the user is an actual human, and not software meant to interact maliciously with the website. This mundane and easily overlooked interface element is an important site where corporate interests and priorities act upon the people who encounter it. CAPTCHAs operate under the assumptions that difference can be detected and that it should be enforced. Because not all humans are able to solve a CAPTCHA, the test additionally enforces a boundary between humans and users. In this article, I analyze the discourses of Google’s reCAPTCHA and argue that this common interface element is a multi-faceted site of production where user labor is extracted every time they solve a reCAPTCHA. The products of this labor are threefold: (1) spam reduction, (2) artificial intelligence and machine learning training data and (3) an ideal of a normative web user. This last product is often overlooked but has wide-reaching implications. Users who solve reCAPTCHAs are producers but simultaneously are produced as users by the reCAPTCHA. The only humans who qualify as ‘authentic’ users are those who can perform this productive labor. Because Google’s reCAPTCHA operates as a site of invisible digital labor, this article works toward making such labor more visible so that users can become more aware of the work they are being asked to perform, and to what ends.

show abstract

“…From the literature search results, there are currently several methods that can be used to improve the security of sending data using the HTTP protocol. These security methods include Hypertext Transfer Protocol Secure (HTTPS) [10], Secure Hypertext Protocol (SHTTP) [10], and Completely Automated Public Turing test to tell Computers and Humans Apart (CAPTCHA) [11]. However, several other research results show there are still some weaknesses in using HTTPS [12].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Security Signing Data Authentication Integrity in Combination of Digest And AES Message Algorithm

Rasna

Matdoan

Alam

2021

IJIIS : Int. J. Inform. Inform. Systems.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Online information systems with the Single Sign-On (SSO) model are currently widely used by many companies. Single Sign-On (SSO) is an independent authentication model. This system runs on the Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) protocol. Sending data or information without security is at risk of eavesdropping on information by the authorities. This study aims to compare the combination of Message-Digest and Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) algorithms to improve data security by modifying dynamic keys. The test results show that in each execution the user name and password with the MD5 algorithm are always the same while in the AES algorithm the results are always different so it is safe from replay attacks. So that the Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) algorithm can secure data through the Single-Sign-On authentication process with high-security accuracy.

show abstract

You need to show that you are not a robot

Cited by 12 publications

References 36 publications

Ontological Boundaries between Humans and Computers and the Implications for Human-Machine Communication

Ontological Boundaries between Humans and Computers and the Implications for Human-Machine Communication

reCAPTCHA Challenges and the Production of the Ideal Web User

Comparison of Security Signing Data Authentication Integrity in Combination of Digest And AES Message Algorithm

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About