Well, I just tried to post with my Macbook and can't figure out how you guys got it to work with VoiceOver. I clicked on the pop-up help button, cause that's the only one I saw besides continue. And all it did was explain to me that the visually-impaired can choose an audio challenge to hear digits instead of the visual challenge, but I saw no button or link to let me choose that. I'm confused. Please help.
Thanks, Tiffanitsa On 6/26/08, Karen Lewellen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sorry about that. it did start here, and some have discussed their > problems using vo and doing the same task. > Where else is it supposed to be then? > > > On Thu, 26 Jun 2008, Scott Rutkowski wrote: > >> Guys and girls can we take this thread to it's propper location? >> How does it relate to the macvisionaries list? >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Karen Lewellen" >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "General discussions on all topics relating to the use of Mac OS X by >> theblind" <[email protected]> >> Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 2:22 PM >> Subject: Re: Please Join Me In Making Craigslist Accessible Again >> >> >> Does someone have the ear of anyone at craigslist? They should see this >> thread, since you cannot even comment over there without the test. >> Frankly I do not like the phone number thing, but they *could* create an >> account category for those who have once they confirm the reasoning get >> access. >> dealing with this problem now, desire posting and I cannot since I know >> the voice thing is totally out. >> Karen >> >> On Wed, 25 Jun 2008, Tiffany D wrote: >> >>> What about having a pin to type in, one that's only for your account? >>> I realise that not all posters have an account, but I've seen other >>> sites do it, not necessarily for antispam, but anyway. There has to >>> be some kind of easier sollution. As for the phone number, sounds >>> like a good idea. What if you had an assigned number for your account >>> so that you can't keep changing it like the child in your sinario? >>> >>> On 6/25/08, Cara Quinn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> > Actually this is remarkably timely. I just finished doing this not >>> > five mins ago! lol! I was posting under Lessons and Tutoring which >>> > is one of the categories that require phone verification. I gave them >>> > my VOIP (Packet 8) number and it came back as unverifiable! ick! >>> > >>> > So I Googled, and apparently, the provider they're using may >>> > actually be categorically denying service to certain providers. So >>> > there ya go! lol! >>> > >>> > -Bloody draconian if you ask me! <smile> >>> > >>> > On the Mac end of this issue, as has been brought up here earlier >>> > this week, I had no problems at all accessing the captcha audio, but I >>> > did need to click on an area of the screen which VO couldn't >>> > announce. The invisible link did work though. >>> > >>> > Now, this is not to say that the audio captcha itself was a piece >>> > of cake, because these were not only some of the most difficult >>> > captchas I've heard, but also I believe this stage of the process may >>> > have some issues, as I seemed, at one point, to be caught up in a >>> > situation where it wasn't liking my input, no matter if it agreed with >>> > the audio or not. But that's getting OT. >>> > >>> > All in all, from my exp, it *is* possible to do this process on the >>> > Mac side with Safari / VO, but in general, the process itself, as CL >>> > has made it now, sure isn't a pretty one! lol! >>> > >>> > Have an awesome day!… >>> > >>> > Smiles, >>> > >>> > Cara :) >>> > >>> > >>> > On Jun 25, 2008, at 2:20 PM, Brent Harding wrote: >>> > >>> > > Yeah, that's a good way to do it, but don't block cell phones and >>> > > voip providers. I heard on some voip news site that they block >>> > > certain providers by exchange on the outgoing calls you have to >>> > > verify posts on parts of craigslist that require phone verification, >>> > > whatever those are. >>> > > >>> > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris Blouch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> > > To: "General discussions on all topics relating to the use of Mac OS >>> > > X by theblind" <[email protected]> >>> > > Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 3:58 PM >>> > > Subject: Re: Please Join Me In Making Craigslist Accessible Again >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > > Yes, it's a hard problem. I was talking with some folks about >>> > > > alternative accessible solutions to Captcha and one possibility >>> > > > was >>> > > > to have the ability to enter a phone number and then have them >>> > > > call >>> > > > you with an automated series of letters/numbers read on the phone >>> > > > which you would type into the web page. This has some of the same >>> > > > benefits of cost to the hacker and can be rate limited to prevent >>> > > > repeated attacks. As you say, it also requires some trust and good >>> > > > privacy policy that they won't be using your number for anything >>> > > > else. Of course I also pointed out that any school kid would love >>> > > > this service as a prank to ring up somebody's house at the wee >>> > > > hours of the morning via any web browser. I think this issue >>> > > > pretty >>> > > > much put an end to that solution. >>> > > > >>> > > > CB >>> > > > >>> > > > Jacob Schmude wrote: >>> > > > > The problem with that is the issue of privacy. I'd prefer not to >>> > > > > allow any old forum moderator to have my phone number, for >>> > > > > example. Even getting past that, phone numbers can be faked, and >>> > > > > I'd imagine the phone system would have to be automated, which >>> > > > > means that once the counter-response is figured out it could be >>> > > > > cracked rather easily. On top of that, what if the web site in >>> > > > > question isn't in your country of residence? Some of those >>> > > > > international rates can get nasty, at least in the U.S. >>> > > > > This is a problem with no easy solution, unfortunately, though I >>> > > > > personally believe that questions structured in an odd way that >>> > > > > the human brain could figure out is the best compromise. It has >>> > > > > its problems, such as needing to be familiar with the language >>> > > > > in >>> > > > > question, but at the same time I believe it to resolve most of >>> > > > > the >>> > > > > other problems. Let's face it, no matter what security measure >>> > > > > anyone comes up with there will always be someone to break it. >>> > > > > And >>> > > > > the ones trying to make things secure wind up playing catch-up >>> > > > > as >>> > > > > their security measures are broken. The question in my mind is >>> > > > > how >>> > > > > much security will the end users tolerate? Hopefully it's a >>> > > > > question we won't ever have to actually see answered. >>> > > > > >>> > > > > On Jun 20, 2008, at 9:25, Chris Blouch wrote: >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > This is another example of how to avoid hackers getting in. >>> > > > > > Add >>> > > > > > some real expense and traceable communications to the >>> > > > > > authentication process. A hacker doesn't care if they have to >>> > > > > > try >>> > > > > > 10000 times to crack one captcha since they are doing though >>> > > > > > some >>> > > > > > botnet. The bandwidth and compute power are essentially free >>> > > > > > and >>> > > > > > they can hide behind a shield of relative anonymity. If they >>> > > > > > have >>> > > > > > to make a phone call that raises the bar. For one that call is >>> > > > > > traceable so if something funny happens it comes back to a >>> > > > > > phone >>> > > > > > number under somebody's name. It also has a real cost as the >>> > > > > > phone line or cell phone account costs real money and they >>> > > > > > can't >>> > > > > > automate it so some real human will have to make the call. The >>> > > > > > 10000 tries now isn't such a great deal. >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > CB >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > Dan Eickmeier wrote: >>> > > > > > > And that is good for those who are on cell phone providers >>> > > > > > > that >>> > > > > > > support that verrification. Mine didn't, and I had to email >>> > > > > > > their support to get it fixed. >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > On 19-Jun-08, at 12:21 AM, Chelsea wrote: >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > Well, that is good for those who have talking cell phones. >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > :( >>> > > > > > > > On Jun 18, 2008, at 9:17 PM, John Moore wrote: >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > They should do it like Facebook, where they take the >>> > > > > > > > > Captcha >>> > > > > > > > > away when you varify your cell phone number with a code >>> > > > > > > > > they >>> > > > > > > > > send you via text message. When you type the code in >>> > > > > > > > > right, >>> > > > > > > > > Captcha becomes nonexistent. >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > >>> > --- >>> > View my Online Portfolio at: >>> > http://www.onemodelplace.com/CaraQuinn >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> >> >> >> >>
