The stuff private contractors write is typically complete crap with respect to security. There was never a leak where some proprietary communication software was leaked and all security researchers were stunned about how well though through everything was.

But the opposite happens all the time that some government funded closed source military software gets leaked and everybody start's laughing about how poorly that crap was implemented.

Or stacked trays of eggs 🤣

I'm fairly certain that's not how it works 🤣

Easy to say of it would only be used to classify/grade data but because this is a CAPTCHA it somehow has to determine if you answer is "correct" and probably does that by checking if other people agreed with you on the majority of cases and then it gets tricky because one would not only have to take into account if the outline is correct but one thinks that other people would agree with that assessment if you don't want to get another set of images because the server couldn't tell of you are a human.

I'm pretty sure many of those are "AI" edits or suggestions.

Assassination Classroom (2015) ?

And now everybody together... C O E V O L U T I O N

Reducing the attack surface by not using well established and battle tested crates but reinventing the wheel inside this closed source project 🤣

Thank you for your kind words, really appreciate it.

No I didn't say that (at least didn't mean to, am not a native speaker). What I tried to say was that there are always options to reduce the risks even more but we still don't do them because it would make other aspects of life harder. Currently a lot of people (by design) have the mental and physical fitness to get a driver's license. We could theoretically up the requirements a lot (think pilots). It would lead to way less cars, less car accidents, more experienced drivers, probably even more car pooling, etc. But it would be at the cost of flexibility for a lot of people and thus we don't implement that and accept the risk. We could also set stricter speed limits. Think about just halfing all existing speed limits. Of course the streets would be safer but it's again a tradeoff and we don't do that because people like to drive fast and accept the risk. Currently most things come down to the fact that we try to reduce risk while keeping the inconvenience cost low but there are limits to this approach - which is fine if everybody understands that this basically means that we accept the risks.

Back to the original topic, the same is true for a pandemic. Of course there are less deaths with lockdowns - but at what cost? Is it worth it that we lock everybody up to reduce the risk?

You also probably help with edge cases. All it needs for them is to shift (and or rotate) the images slightly when presented to other people to get more accurate results.

Not only that but there is very likely a huge beauty bias in the training sets.