zlacker

> Websites funded by ads require proof that their users are human and not bots...Social websites need to differentiate between real user engagement and fake engagement...Users playing online games want assurance that other players are adhering to the game's rules.

The whole ad based web industry is really desperate to authenticate humans from bots isn’t?

>>irusen+(OP)
It’s not authenticating humans, though— just sanctioned software and hardware.

There’s no reason you couldn’t hook a bot up, via video feed and inputs, to an “attestable” device and have it use the Internet that way. This just raises the bar on bot sophistication.

In another thread somebody talked about pointing a camera at a phone and using a robot “finger” to interact with it. If anything WEI would make that easier because you’re not getting CAPTCHAs anymore! You’re a “human”, after all.

>>EvanAn+R1
This is also how sophisticated game cheating systems work[1]. No amount of rootkit-like anti-cheat will help when you're cheating with a capture card and emulated mouse and keyboard.

[1] https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2021/07/cheat-maker-brags-of-...

>>irusen+(OP)
Nah, they want us to think they do. But bot clicks are clicks and can be charged. I read somewhere that 80-90% of facebook ad clicks were bots. That seems inline with the traffic I see on some commercial website I work on. Most traffic is from bots, crawlers, scanners and 'security researchers'.

Sometimes I pick up on actual fraud, like 'affiliate marketing' traffic 'boosters' that just result in someone clicking through a banner, making and order and not paying. 200 times in a day. Nobody cares, as long as the stats look good