h a l f b a k e r y
Superficial Intelligence
idea:
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, best, random
meta:
news, help, about, links, report a problem
account:
Browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
or Create a new account.
|
|
|
aka CAPTCAA
"completely automated public teat-recognition test to tell children and adults apart"
When an adult looks at the "Dolphin Illusion" (see link below), s/he sees a couple making love. When a pre-pubescent child looks at the illusion s/he sees 9 dolphins.
The Dolphin Illusion works
with amazing precision; 99% of adults have serious difficulty picking out the dolphins, even after they are told to look for them, while kids spot them immediately.
Children's web forums could use this illusion as an age verification filter. When logging in to the forum, you are shown the illusion and asked "How many mammals do you see in this picture?". You have 5 seconds to answer the question. If your answer is anything but "nine", you are denied access, and a new illusion loads (taken from a large repository), only with a different number of dolphins (or other mammals), and a different sexual position. If you get the answer wrong more than 5 times your IP-address is blocked for the period of a week.
Anyone above the age of about 15 will have trouble accessing the forum.
Dolphin Illusion
http://www.frenblog...n/dolphin-illusion/
[manicdictator, Mar 10 2008]
The Art of Sandro Del Prete
http://www.del-prete.ch/
More about the artist who painted the dolphin/lovers illusion. [jutta, Mar 11 2008]
[link]
|
| |
Any test likes this works precisely once, and the perv (or other intended filtee) answers correctly the next time, from a different IP address. |
|
| |
Though that is a cute illusion - thanks for sharing it! |
|
| |
You seem to misunderstand how my idea works. See description - i've added to phrase "taken from a large repository" to clarify |
|
| |
It's similar to the packaging of Kellogs Corn Flakes. All I see is a huge cock. |
|
| |
//99% of adults have serious difficulty picking out the dolphins, even after they are told to look for them, while kids spot them immediately.// |
|
| |
From the comments below the picture, I'd say that's something of an over-estimate. |
|
| |
//If your answer is anything but "nine", you are denied access// |
|
| |
Meanwhile the Smartass Forum can use the same image in its verification process, but you can only enter the forum if you answered "11" (nine dolphins plus the two humans, who are also mammals). |
|
| |
Strange that there are nipples illustrated. |
|
| |
// The Dolphin Illusion works with amazing precision; 99% of adults have serious difficulty picking out the dolphins, |
|
| |
And I'm sure you have no trouble producing a link to the research that revealed this amazing precision, right? You wouldn't just express astonishment at a number that's completely made-up, right? |
|
| |
(-) Grrr. Rehashed, un-fact-checked conjecture. We hates, hates, hates it. |
|
| |
Well, maybe if I hadn't been told to look for dolphins it would be hard. Knowing it's an optical illusion, I had no trouble finding them. |
|
| |
There's also some comments that a five year old boy saw a couple "cuddling" in the picture... about the third one down. |
|
| |
That tells me this test isn't going to fool too many people. Good idea, but you'd likely need a whole lot of different optical illusions, and as they appear to rely on images representing adult activity, there may be legal "pornography" issues. |
|
| |
Furthermore, adults with mentaldisabilities/sheltered lives, or children with adult-related trauma/experience will probably be numerous enough on the internet, to make this a less than ideal solution. |
|
| |
I just asked my 6 year old daughter to tell me what she saw in the picture. She said, "A naked woman with someone's arms around her." Guess that fucks up your verification theory, right there. |
|
| |
//It's similar to the packaging of Kellogs Corn Flakes. All I see is a huge cock//
That makes two of us, [IT]. |
|
| |
I don't think any real world test will be able to reliably identify pedophiles. And even if you can filter out children from adults, older children often deliberately disrupt the play of younger children (aka bullying). |
|
| |
Imho, kiddy sites need to make sure that inappropriate activity is simply not possible on the site. The interface should only permit the kind of activities unsuspecting parents would expect their children to engage in on the site. If free text communication is allowed at all, then certain words and/or phrases should be filtered out and flagged to active administrators. |
|
| |
But, imho, kiddy sites are not appropriate for children in the first place! Why on eath are these children indoors trying to interact with other children in some virtaul world, when they should be outside playing real games with real children, making real friendships? |
|
| |
[Goes off to look at his Cornflakes package more closely...] |
|
| |
<looks at "Crunchy Nut" Cornflakes in a new light> |
|
| |
[crash]: "It's a Hindu god" |
|
| |
Don't ever try to anticipate what children will think. |
|
| |
I saw dolphins, my children both saw naked people. What does that mean? A jaded attitude towards lurve, maybe? |
|
| |
I saw them both at a glance. Must be my art-appreciation powers. |
|
| |
I wonder which [phoenix] saw. |
|
| |
Pretty bad verification, especially considering that many pedos are apparently "kids at heart". Maybe THEY could use this. If you see dolphins, turn on your parent's webcam. (-) for an unreliable illusion. |
|
| |
(Yep, I finally realized my own accidental name joke.) |
|
| |
First glance, nekkid people. Half-second later, dolphins. Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going over to the Sea World website. [-] |
|
| |