From: ivan@siamics.netREMOVE.invalid   
      
   >>>>> On 2025-01-21, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:   
   >>>>> Salvador Mirzo  wrote:   
   >>>>> Sylvia Else  writes:   
      
    >>> How is this going to '"better protect" Google Search against   
    >>> malicious activity, such as bots and spam'?   
      
    >> I believe the idea is that if the robot doesn't speak Javascript,   
    >> it's an easy denial by the web server.  And making bots speak   
    >> Javascript is one step up.  And with Javascript they can likely   
    >> monitor things like mouse movement to detect whether the user   
    >> is a human or a robot.   
      
    > Which of course is one of Google's main businesses, with their   
    > Captchas that don't always need to show a puzzle in order to   
    > validate users as humans.  So if anyone _thinks_ they can achieve   
    > that, you'd expect it to be Google.   
      
   	And they don't even need it to be perfect: a robot that   
   	implements the relevant browser APIs, while possible, /will/   
   	be costlier to run and maintain, thus reducing the profits of   
   	the robot operators, in turn disincentivizing them.   
      
   	Even if that doesn't solve the problem altogether, it will   
   	still likely result in less load for their servers.   
      
   	Not that it invalidates any other reasons they might want to   
   	require Javascript / APIs regardless, mind you.   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)