AutoPuzzles - The Internet's Museum of Rare Cars!
AutoPuzzles Today => News, Information and Feedback => Topic started by: Paul Jaray on May 06, 2014, 10:25:33 AM
-
The Editors/Admins are battling against Google Search by Image, which is completely contrary to the whole spirit of AutoPuzzles where we value fair play above all else. The survival of the Site is at risk because of the actions of those who are not willing to play the game but take advantage of the available technology to unfairly solve puzzles posted in good faith.
We are very mindful of the threat to our existence from Google Search by Image, which continues to be used by a small number of members to gain points to which they are not entitled.
Fair play is an absolute must on our site and we are very proud of the fantastic community spirit practised by the vast majority of AutoPuzzles members...and some members suspected of cheating are currently under investigation.
For that reason we need you help.
We are going to ask randomly at all Puzzlers how they have found the solution to some puzzle or other.
This will be done with no particular order and without any accusation to any puzzler.
Please confirm your acceptance of this policy.
Regards
The Editors
-
I will be the 1st...I'm going to explain how I found each one of the puzzles I'm going to find.
-
I am in total agreement.
I don't know how to use "Search by Image". If I did I would not use it to solve a puzzle. I might succumb to temptation and google one I had tried to find - but then I wouldn't post the answer. What's the point?
-
I am in total agreement.
I don't know how to use "Search by Image". If I did I would not use it to solve a puzzle. I might succumb to temptation and google one I had tried to find - but then I wouldn't post the answer. What's the point?
Quite so. When all's said and done, it's just a game, a bit of fun for car-loving enthusiasts. Hence my sometimes inane/idiotic guesses.
Since reaching the Pros, I'm being shown as the charlatan I am. ;D
I'm all in favour of this new approach. Mind you' I've no idea what the puzzle car is.......
-
Thank you.
It is a game, but some of us spend hours looking for challenging puzzles and it's frustrating to have them solved that way.
We have to react and that's why we need all of your cooperation. ;)
-
I totally agree..First of all I don't even know how to use Google search by image, and like Nicanary and other pros my progress has been painfully slow after my 200th point.
I am lucky enough to have a rather extensive collection of period magazines and have been interested in cars, buses and trucks for over 50 years. However show me anything made before 1935 and I am totally lost. I have to admit that sometimes you strike lucky and find answers when trying to find something else. My favourite find was a baseball player polishing his car..I just googled "Gentleman polishing his Packard" and..
Bingo!
-
I totally agree..First of all I don't even know how to use Google search by image, and like Nicanary and other pros my progress has been painfully slow after my 200th point.
I am lucky enough to have a rather extensive collection of period magazines and have been interested in cars, buses and trucks for over 50 years. However show me anything made before 1935 and I am totally lost. I have to admit that sometimes you strike lucky and find answers when trying to find something else. My favourite find was a baseball player polishing his car..I just googled "Gentleman polishing his Packard" and..
Bingo!
I thought "gentleman polishing his Packard" was a euphemism!
Sorry, as usual I am lowering the standard of the forum...
-
I fully agree with you, Paul. I have never used and surely will never use GSI to answer a puzzle. I have used it a few times to trace back some of my own puzzles when I noticed that I had saved too few facts to answer questions of fellow puzzlers. :D
When the puzzle car is within the range of my personal interest I usually consult my books first and then good old Google with a wide range of search terms (sometimes unicode tables are a great help to google cyrillic words!. The detective work is what AutoPuzzles is about. It is important to keep that spirit.
-
I concur 100% with PJ in this and he has my full support; furthermore I will follow his lead.
I must say though D-type, although I would never ever solve a puzzle by searching by image I do use Google extensively to find cars, both puzzles and solutions. Without doing that it would be very hard indeed to solve many puzzles.
-
That's exactly what I meant, I would NOT use Google "Search by Image", but I do use Google by keywords or Google for images from keywords as well as random guessing.
-
Fair play is an absolute must on our site and we are very proud of the fantastic community spirit practised by the vast majority of AutoPuzzles members...
I wholeheartedly agree...
-
Hi All:
I accept the policy and will identify/explain my method of finding an answer to a given puzzle in the future, assuming of course that I ever get to answer a puzzle anymore ;D ;D.
Not to make a joke, really, I understand it takes away from the spirit of this Forum to use Google SBI.
I am curious, though, do we explain our methodology on every solution or are we just agreeing to being "audited" from time to time. That can take up a lot of bandwidth to explain it on every correct answer.
As a thought, the technology has improved since 2012 when OP listed a few techniques to "mask" photos taken off the Internet in such a way as to make them unreadable to the SBI program. Perhaps if there are now more/new/different ways to do this it would be an idea to post them here.
Bill
-
I'm in of course !
-
I was banned because GIS. so, I agree not to use it for solving puzzles.
-
It is clear that it was easier for people when there was no google search by image . I do not use Google search by image , what's challenge and what´s the merit for finding a autopuzzle whit this tool.
I have been collecting collecting photos of cars on the internet for more than 10 years and I have over 16GB of pictures. I use my files , my intuition and the pages in English and Spanish I know to start searching and if I need to use traditional google search because I have not lot of books. I really like racing cars, special cars (from USA , GB and Australia ) and fiberglass cars and lately I have dicoverd buses. I ussually do not like to ask questions for solving autopuzzles I only do it if I think I need . Those who have been playing a long time I can imagine that many times you have found others in your archives, books or web only looking for an autopuzzle
For me few weeks ago it was gratifying to find an autopuzzle, but now taking several hours searching for being suspected for cheating is not a good rewarding. I have responded to whom asked me how I found his puzzles, so I am the first that thinks all measures to avoid suspicion are well receibed. I would like sugest that all the images were modified to avoid suspicion about the use of google search by image.
I would like to say that if someone suspects from me and he does not want me to try to solve their autopuzzles he can tell me, I spend much time and efforts solving puzzles for being under continuous suspect and I do not like playing this manner.
Sorry for my poor English I have used Google traductor.
-
I have no problem with the new policy, but, honestly, I think the only way to prevent people from using GSBI is to make it ineffective, by using photos that have never been published on the net before, that is to say :
- personal photos taken at car events
- personal and altered scans of books, magazines or brochures
I will probably mostly use these techniques for my forthcoming puzzles.
-
Gents.......
I am on my third glass of wine, which at age 74 plus has it's effects so bear with me.
OG just posted he had been banned for using "GIS".
"GIS" is the internationally accepted term for "Google Image Search" which is accomplished by TYPING in LETTERS some sort of search criteria. Name of a vehicle, name of a country and a vehicle, name of a vehicle and year and country etc. etc.
What we are fighting here is the Google function "Search By Image" or Google SBI or Google GSBI depending on the country where you live. You capture an image from a Forum such as this one, you open Google Image, you select the icon for Google Search By Image, you choose the image you wish to match and upload it to Google Search By Image.
If it has been picked up by Google and is not modified, you will get a match and in the context of this Forum, that is cheating.
Google Image Search, "GIS" is accepted by all of the Forums I belong to as a perfectly legitimate way of trying to solve whatever type of puzzle/question/quiz as it is alphabet driven, not photo image driven. Without the possibility of using Google, whether in the "Google Image Search" function or the normal "Google Search" function for written information, most of the puzzles on this Forum and dozens of others I belong to would never be solved.
I sincerely hope the Editors/Administrators/Monitors on this Forum understand the different terms and I hope the membership does as well.
Bill
-
I sincerely hope the Editors/Administrators/Monitors on this Forum understand the different terms and I hope the membership does as well.
Bill
The Editors certainly know the difference! Googling for pictures is one thing; Using Image Search is quite another..
-
Hi Norman:
My comment was rhetorical, not meant to offend anyone.
It was, in part, motivated by OG's comment that he was banned for using "GIS" or Google Image Search.
If that was truly the case, then it was done in error.
-
I understand that I am an anachronism. I was raised as what I hope to be a gentleman, and if there are rules to whatever pursuit you find yourself involved in, you follow them. If you do not agree with said rules, you either strive to change them or you decline to play. Here's where I'm going with this:
1. I certainly agree that using Google Search By Image (or any other similar image-searching engine) is not playing fair. It involves no skill or knowledge other than the ability to push a few keys, sit back, and let someone else's research answer your question. It is prohibited on this (and many other) "name that _________" forums. Honorable players will not use it. Dishonorable players will not care.
2. The first priority is making certain that everyone - ALL - participants are aware that use of this feature is banned. I believe most of us know this by now, but as we hopefully attract new members they need to know this. The fact is certainly available to them, but unfortunately a lot of new responders just jump right in before they read all the rules. That's just the way the internet is, and I don't have a good answer for it. Is there a way to require any new poster to read, and agree to abide by the rules of the forum before he or she can respond to their initial puzzle?
3. It is easy to become weary of seeing the same, somewhat accusatory disclaimer about GSBI on so many puzzles . . . "We know some of you are cheating". No one likes to have their integrity continually challenged. Those who intend to cheat will continue to do so, and will further their dishonesty by fabricating an explanation of how and where they got the answer. I don't really see how a "spot audit" will help to cut down on truly dishonorable responders. Maybe it will, I guess we should at least give it a try.
4. I agree that using photos that do not appear on the internet for puzzle car subjects is the ultimate deterrent to GSBI abuse . . . But that sincerely limits the amount of material available to draw puzzle cars from. Those of us with larger libraries of obscure photos have a definite advantage there. I have not yet posted a puzzle car (or very few, it's been so long I don't actually recall) because I participate as a moderator in enough other Automobile Quiz sites that my time is somewhat limited to "host" a quiz. I do enjoy searching at my leisure for the solution to the excellent puzzles our more senior members provide.
5. To my way of thinking, the search is at least half of the fun. Some of the memorable (and yes, not so memorable) vehicles I have discovered while hot on the trail of the latest puzzle car are true gems. To utilize GSBI is to rob yourself of that experience. I won't do it, and neither should you. I have no way of knowing exactly how much of a problem this is on the forum, although I would agree that some of the more difficult and obscure vehicles being quickly and accurately identified by a newer member may be somewhat suspicious. Perhaps that particular car was a pet passion of his . . Or not?
So proceed with "spot audits" if you must, I hope it helps. As I said, I am an anachronism. My word as a gentlemen should be enough.
But that's only true among gentlemen, isn't it? Play on, my friends. Don't let the dishonest few diminish our fun. Sorry for the lengthy rant. Perhaps I need a nap.
-
Fair play is an absolute must on our site and we are very proud of the fantastic community spirit practised by the vast majority of AutoPuzzles members...
I wholeheartedly agree...
Second that. Count on me guys.
-
1st of all, I'd like to clarify 2 things:
1. We are not asking to explain each time how did you find a puzzle. Everything will proceed as before. Please be patient and don't feel offended if sometimes, randomly and without any implicit accusation, we'll ask how did you find a certain puzzle.
2. Google (or any other search engine) is a valid tool to find a puzzle. There's no harm in looking for a car using google and typing keywords. When you do that, you are playing the right way, searching, browsing and spending hours using some hints you find. On the other hand, if you pick the puzzle pic and use Google's 'Search By Image' function you are looking for the 'puzzle pic', where it comes from, just to get the point! And that's against the spirit of Autopuzzles.
-
Hi Norman:
My comment was rhetorical, not meant to offend anyone.
It was, in part, motivated by OG's comment that he was banned for using "GIS" or Google Image Search.
If that was truly the case, then it was done in error.
It was for using Google Search by Image; there can be a bit of confusion over Image Search and Search by Image..
But he accepted the decision and has now left it behind thankfully.
-
I will be the 1st...I'm going to explain how I found each one of the puzzles I'm going to find.
Excellent - me too!
-
Hi,
I agree with the fight against Google Search by Image... but I'm not sure this is really the best solution...
If someone wants to gain puzzle points in an unfair way (I still don't understand why someone want to do it...) he can be unfair also in the explanation of his solution...
For instance... (it's only an example... ;) ) PJ has posted some screenshots of his folders with the pictures... nice... but how do we know that the pictures were there before he solved the puzzle?? Maybe he solved it with GSBI and then saved the pictures... ;D
So... I think that the only solution to avoid the problem is to post puzzles that cannot be found via GSBI... and the best way to do it is to search the picture in this way before posting the puzzle... if Google find the picture... it's time to use some graphic camouflage on the image... until google does not find it anymore...
-
I laud PJ for trying to attack this through openness and honesty. :thumbsup:
If the only solution to this ongoing challenge is to post personal pictures from ones own camera or scanner, or to mutilate pictures until they are virtually unrecognizable, my puzzle-posting days are through.
-
I laud PJ for trying to attack this through openness and honesty. :thumbsup:
If the only solution to this ongoing challenge is to post personal pictures from ones own camera or scanner, or to mutilate pictures until they are virtually unrecognizable, my puzzle-posting days are through.
I hope nobody thinks I'm really accusing PJ... :P
Again I really don't understand how anyone would want to gain points unfairly... but I do not think these people would have no problem to falsify an explanation...
-
And if I know the car? How do I explain how I solved the puzzle... "I solved the puzzle because I know this car"... what should you reply??
-
And if I know the car? How do I explain how I solved the puzzle... "I solved the puzzle because I know this car"... what should you reply??
Facing that dilemma right now :scratch: I'm going to answer the puzzle and see what happens.
Of course I agree with not using Google SBI to solve puzzles.
-
@serra: we decided this strategy to avoid exactly what you wrote. It's not pleasant for a true and fair player to be questioned each time.
So far a real cheater could always play offended once questioned.
Now we are asking you all (cheaters and players) to support us, because we are in the same team.
@Iluvatar, I thought of that too...I was going to post a screenshot of the folder containing the folders, where you can read 'Moretti last modified mm\dd\yyyy' but then it was a bit too far (and sometimes It can be modified for good reasons after the puzzle has been posted).
You are right, a cheater can make up an explanation but if we can 'smell' cheaters now, the deepest they have to go with theyr lies, the bigger the smell will became.
But we are not going to play Sherlock Holmes, they will always be able to cheat and after all it's not about that either:
we just want to send a message.
To sum up, the best way to prevent cheaters to cheat is to use modified pictures: it's already been done, some of us do it regularly and it make things harder.
I won't do that (and it's my personal opinion here) because I don't care!
I'll explain: some years ago, I used to post some puzzles with the answer written below in smal beige print. To read it you just had to select it and copy in a notepad or wherever to read it.
Now, if you are a real fairplayer, you solve it the old fashioned way...if you are a cheater, you read it but you are not fooling anyone else but yourself, IMHO.
This is not about me, but about Autopuzzles and the people behind it, who spend hours looking for challenging puzzles to post. For them, (us), in respect of theyr work (our) we should join our efforts to isolate cheaters.
If you know a car, because you know it, don't worry you won't be questioned. If you keep knowing cars like that, you won't be banned for that...if 198 of your 200 points will be earned because you know them, just like that, well, you'll be a Pro.
-
@Iluvatar, I thought of that too...I was going to post a screenshot of the folder containing the folders, where you can read 'Moretti last modified mm\dd\yyyy' but then it was a bit too far (and sometimes It can be modified for good reasons after the puzzle has been posted).
You are right, a cheater can make up an explanation but if we can 'smell' cheaters now, the deepest they have to go with theyr lies, the bigger the smell will became.
But we are not going to play Sherlock Holmes, they will always be able to cheat and after all it's not about that either:
we just want to send a message.
To sum up, the best way to prevent cheaters to cheat is to use modified pictures: it's already been done, some of us do it regularly and it make things harder.
I won't do that (and it's my personal opinion here) because I don't care!
I'll explain: some years ago, I used to post some puzzles with the answer written below in smal beige print. To read it you just had to select it and copy in a notepad or wherever to read it.
Now, if you are a real fairplayer, you solve it the old fashioned way...if you are a cheater, you read it but you are not fooling anyone else but yourself, IMHO.
This is not about me, but about Autopuzzles and the people behind it, who spend hours looking for challenging puzzles to post. For them, (us), in respect of theyr work (our) we should join our efforts to isolate cheaters.
If you know a car, because you know it, don't worry you won't be questioned. If you keep knowing cars like that, you won't be banned for that...if 198 of your 200 points will be earned because you know them, just like that, well, you'll be a Pro.
:thumbsup:
-
I've been asked if each guess or answer has to be explained.
Nothing will change in the usual way of playing: you can guess as before and there will be no need to prove or explain anything.
From time to time, we can ask how the puzzle was solved: only in that case, you are kindly invited to expalin it without taking it personal and with no fear at all if you do not have a 'convincing story' ;) ...we won't investigate, we just want to make things harder for smart-asses.
-
I'm so inept at IT that I wouldn't know how to modify a photo - certainly I don't have a "paintshop" facility. So all members can rest assured that my puzzle photos will be available somewhere on the internet.
But I agree with the editors and long-standing members - it's not difficult to tell when something suspicious is happening. I was a bit naive when I joined, and I used to just post a blunt and matter-of-fact answer, because I KNEW the answer. If you're a UK-born classic and racing car enthusiast, you know a British Salmson when you see it. On the other hand, you don't know some 1920s German cyclecar of which only 150 were made. I hope you see my point.
I don't have an archive of my own, only what's in my head from 50 years of reading magazines and books. Maybe I'll get my daughter to teach me how to scan photos and transfer them to my desktop (I've surprised myself that I know THAT much about IT!). But in the meantime I've got to rely on all of us acting like gentlemen. I quite enjoy not being able to solve the Pro puzzles - it's a "British" thing that we accept being useless at everything.
I have already advised one of the editors that if cheating becomes a routine matter, then I'm leaving. No more endless succession of Formula Junior one-offs! The future of this site is in our own hands.
-
I thought "gentleman polishing his Packard" was a euphemism!
Sorry, as usual I am lowering the standard of the forum...
Now THAT'S funny!!!!
-
I accept the policy.
Techniques I have seen work to confound SBI techniques:
1) with the image on your screen, take a picture of the car with a cell phone or camera. This works best at an angle, or with something partially obscuring the image. I found that a dirty beverage glass works well.
2) Use images you took yourself. Not all of us encounter strange or exotic vehicles in person, but when we do it is nice to be able to share them here.
-
Enough has probably been said already, but I am fully in agreement with this policy. It's the research and detective work that interests me, and if this results in finding the answer (an increasingly rare event these days), then the reward is the sense of achievement, rather than the puzzle point.
I would always be happy to explain how I found an answer - so long as I could remember, that is! Some time ago I solved a puzzle where John Duff, one of the "Bentley Boys" in the 1920s was appearing as a sword-fight double in a movie. Someone of the same name sent me a PM to ask where I had found the information about his great-uncle. I went back through notes and browser history on two PCs, but just couldn't find the source, and had to admit that, while I remembered it was in an online book, I was completely unable to find it any more. :-[
I guess that's one excuse I won't be able to use again! ;D
-
@serra: we decided this strategy to avoid exactly what you wrote. It's not pleasant for a true and fair player to be questioned each time.
So far a real cheater could always play offended once questioned.
Now we are asking you all (cheaters and players) to support us, because we are in the same team.
@Iluvatar, I thought of that too...I was going to post a screenshot of the folder containing the folders, where you can read 'Moretti last modified mm\dd\yyyy' but then it was a bit too far (and sometimes It can be modified for good reasons after the puzzle has been posted).
You are right, a cheater can make up an explanation but if we can 'smell' cheaters now, the deepest they have to go with theyr lies, the bigger the smell will became.
But we are not going to play Sherlock Holmes, they will always be able to cheat and after all it's not about that either:
we just want to send a message.
To sum up, the best way to prevent cheaters to cheat is to use modified pictures: it's already been done, some of us do it regularly and it make things harder.
I won't do that (and it's my personal opinion here) because I don't care!
I'll explain: some years ago, I used to post some puzzles with the answer written below in smal beige print. To read it you just had to select it and copy in a notepad or wherever to read it.
Now, if you are a real fairplayer, you solve it the old fashioned way...if you are a cheater, you read it but you are not fooling anyone else but yourself, IMHO.
This is not about me, but about Autopuzzles and the people behind it, who spend hours looking for challenging puzzles to post. For them, (us), in respect of theyr work (our) we should join our efforts to isolate cheaters.
If you know a car, because you know it, don't worry you won't be questioned. If you keep knowing cars like that, you won't be banned for that...if 198 of your 200 points will be earned because you know them, just like that, well, you'll be a Pro.
Hi,
I agree with the fight against Google Search by Image... but I'm not sure this is really the best solution...
If someone wants to gain puzzle points in an unfair way (I still don't understand why someone want to do it...) he can be unfair also in the explanation of his solution...
For instance... (it's only an example... ;) ) PJ has posted some screenshots of his folders with the pictures... nice... but how do we know that the pictures were there before he solved the puzzle?? Maybe he solved it with GSBI and then saved the pictures... ;D
So... I think that the only solution to avoid the problem is to post puzzles that cannot be found via GSBI... and the best way to do it is to search the picture in this way before posting the puzzle... if Google find the picture... it's time to use some graphic camouflage on the image... until google does not find it anymore...
:thumbsup:
-
I agree with the idea, as well! Count me in.
I agree that the modification of pictures might not be the best solution to keep puzzlers play fairly.
However, I will keep modifying my future puzzles (when needed) for two main reasons:
- To keep puzzling fun and challenging, like it was when I joined AP years ago...
- To be sure that no bad intentions to earn points illegally will work. This is is my own policy that "you have to know or correctly guess my puzzle car to get the point". I believe this well complies with the whole idea that PJ has emphasized here in this thread.
Happy puzzling, guys! I trust in fair game.
Game and demonstration a knowledge - that's the spirit of AP. Puzzle Points will earn You nothing, but knowing that You scored each and every of them fairly using only Your own knowledge and research skills and being at some moment better than other puzzlers, in a fair gentlemen way, is what should make You proud of Yourself. I truly believe such mindset leads to the success at AutoPuzzles and such members are and will always be the most respected and most appreciated here on this forum.
It's my honor to be here!
-
Of course you can count me in, but as has been said a couple of times justfying knowing a car can be difficult when (e.g.) I've known what one of those was since someone at Hatfield Tech College had one in 1957.
There's an unsolved puzzle now (which won't get to the Pro level so I'll not get a go at it) that is one of a classic set of photos that most of us older British enthusiasts have "always" known.
I don't post many puzzles, mainly because I prefer to use my own photos and many are transparancies - however I got a gizmo for scanning trannies last month and my most recent offering was done that way. Trouble then was shaky memory and no notes about when it was taken!
-
I'll certainly agree to answering questions about how I arrived at a puzzle's solution. I can't understand anyone taking offense to the practice. Also it seems senseless to gather points by GSBI; Without the rules there is no game, and the game is comprised of searching, solving and then savoring your accomplishment. The point you gain is windowdressing, but the process is all-important.
For me, answering a question will mainly consist of, "well, the wheels looked kinda Citroen-y, but the bodywork looked kinda kludged together, so I searched Google Images for Citroen specials AND homebuilt sports cars, and found a picture on quasimodocars.com".
My reference library is sparse, so I depend on Google Image Search heavily. I usually get sidetracked by unrelated search returns. I've never used GSBI, but I'll admit to being sorely tempted by some of the puzzles here that will not yield to my searches, because I'm so intrigued by the puzzle car that I want an immediate answer and more information...not as a means to get points.
What do you gentlemen think of using PMs as the means of asking and answering the questions as to search method? Putting the question in the body of the puzzle itself is faintly damning, and the answer may reveal an internet source that someone prefers to keep to themselves. We could simply post, "PM sent" upon receiving a correct puzzle answer, then the PM text would say "Congratulations! Now for the point, how in hell did you do that?" ;D
-
I understand that I am an anachronism. I was raised as what I hope to be a gentleman, and if there are rules to whatever pursuit you find yourself involved in, you follow them. If you do not agree with said rules, you either strive to change them or you decline to play. Here's where I'm going with this:
1. I certainly agree that using Google Search By Image (or any other similar image-searching engine) is not playing fair. It involves no skill or knowledge other than the ability to push a few keys, sit back, and let someone else's research answer your question. It is prohibited on this (and many other) "name that _________" forums. Honorable players will not use it. Dishonorable players will not care.
2. The first priority is making certain that everyone - ALL - participants are aware that use of this feature is banned. I believe most of us know this by now, but as we hopefully attract new members they need to know this. The fact is certainly available to them, but unfortunately a lot of new responders just jump right in before they read all the rules. That's just the way the internet is, and I don't have a good answer for it. Is there a way to require any new poster to read, and agree to abide by the rules of the forum before he or she can respond to their initial puzzle?
3. It is easy to become weary of seeing the same, somewhat accusatory disclaimer about GSBI on so many puzzles . . . "We know some of you are cheating". No one likes to have their integrity continually challenged. Those who intend to cheat will continue to do so, and will further their dishonesty by fabricating an explanation of how and where they got the answer. I don't really see how a "spot audit" will help to cut down on truly dishonorable responders. Maybe it will, I guess we should at least give it a try.
4. I agree that using photos that do not appear on the internet for puzzle car subjects is the ultimate deterrent to GSBI abuse . . . But that sincerely limits the amount of material available to draw puzzle cars from. Those of us with larger libraries of obscure photos have a definite advantage there. I have not yet posted a puzzle car (or very few, it's been so long I don't actually recall) because I participate as a moderator in enough other Automobile Quiz sites that my time is somewhat limited to "host" a quiz. I do enjoy searching at my leisure for the solution to the excellent puzzles our more senior members provide.
5. To my way of thinking, the search is at least half of the fun. Some of the memorable (and yes, not so memorable) vehicles I have discovered while hot on the trail of the latest puzzle car are true gems. To utilize GSBI is to rob yourself of that experience. I won't do it, and neither should you. I have no way of knowing exactly how much of a problem this is on the forum, although I would agree that some of the more difficult and obscure vehicles being quickly and accurately identified by a newer member may be somewhat suspicious. Perhaps that particular car was a pet passion of his . . Or not?
So proceed with "spot audits" if you must, I hope it helps. As I said, I am an anachronism. My word as a gentlemen should be enough.
But that's only true among gentlemen, isn't it? Play on, my friends. Don't let the dishonest few diminish our fun. Sorry for the lengthy rant. Perhaps I need a nap.
I would largely echo the above quote. When I joined AutoPuzzles I agreed to follow the rules as given, and if revised. When I can no longer do this, I will voluntarily withdraw rather than continue in violation of stated policy. In an automotive context, it is much like obeying the speed limit, even if it sometimes seems to be unrealistic. When one obtains a driving license, one agrees to follow the rules, or face sanctions, or forfeiture. Still, as we all know, there are those who routinely violate the speed limit despite the sanctions, frequently to the annoyance and/or endangerment of other drivers. There will always be those individuals, but this is not grounds for closing the roadway, or harassing those drivers who do obey the rules.
Like others here, I do not have a personal library/archive of automotive information. My only means of solving posted puzzles is through experience/memory (which, at my age, shrinks daily), and via the internet. In my retirement, I find it enjoyable to do internet research in an attempt to solve posted puzzles, using techniques developed over many years searching for components used in my field of engineering. By doing this I gain knowledge in the field of automotive history, which I find most interesting.
As some others may have observed, I generally am very selective in the puzzles that I attempt to solve, usually concentrating on pre-1960 (especially pre-1935) production (sometimes very limited production) vehicles. Generally each one requires a great deal of researching, although I do occasionally get lucky. Usually I try to spot vehicles that interest me as soon as they are posted in the Rookie or Expert sections, even though I can not participate unless they are eventually moved up to the Professional section. I make this investment in time and effort being fully aware that it is highly unlikely that a particular puzzle will ever reach the Professional level before it is solved. If I am successful in my research, I file the solution in my "AutoPuzzles Previews" folder, and hope that I may get to use it when/if the subject becomes available to me. If one of these pre-solved puzzles does reach the Professional level, and I am able to file the solution before some of our automotive geniuses (you know who you are) can jump in, my research is rewarded with a point. If I am beaten either at a lower level, or the Professional level, the point is lost, but my effort was not wasted as I have gained pleasure and knowledge by joining in the race, even if I did not win.
When I quickly file one of these pre-solved puzzle answers, it might appear to some that I may have unfairly used GSBI in order to answer so rapidly. This is only because they are unaware of all of the research time spent prior to the puzzle moving up to the Professional level. Like fyreline, I sometimes grow weary of all of the redundant disclaimers regarding GSBI. My position is: Just because some insist on not following the rules (like speeders), that is no reason to quit participating (driving). Just knowing that you, and most of the others, are honorable should be enough.
Having said all this, I will continue to abide by the rules, and submit to the audits, if required, but if said audits become onerous I'm gone. Perhaps it is an American thing, but I still believe that one is innocent until proven guilty, and one should not have to prove innocence.
-
Count me in too PJ. I don't have any idea about how to use Google Search by Image, but the concept is totally against what Auto Puzzles stands for.
As you know, I tend to use images sourced from printed materials that have not previously appeared on the internet (which helps to combat Google Search by Image), and this might explain why so many of my puzzles remain unsolved in the Black Hole section ;)
-
I remember Norman (Carnut) asking me a few times via PM how I had solved his puzzles, he must have been happy as I didn't get banned.
Posting images scanned from books and digitally obscuring them with leaves, stars etc. is an excellent way to stop the cheating, but sadly its also an excellent way of stopping 99% of us from solving the puzzles using our own automobile experience to recognise small elements within an image which can provide much needed clues that can be used to solve a puzzle.
Most of us will probably never see the books or magazines that contain the rare images, and If a cars wheels, doorhandles, steering wheel location and other parts are obscured have little chance of ever figuring out what it is.
I was lucky enough to have become a Professional on here a while ago, but am now finding the puzzles take a huge amount of time to solve which sadly is time I cannot afford to spend anymores.
I therefore suggest that puzzle posters disclose to the puzzlers from the start where the image came from, internet, book, magazine , personal photograph or piece of artwork etc. and larger amounts of points are awarded for puzzles that are sourced from media besides the internet. i.e.:-
1 point for internet sourced
2 points for book sourced
4 points for magazine
8 points personal photo
16 points artwork or drawing
Another thing to take into account is that in the early days of this forum, puzzles must have been easier to solve as the vehicles pictured were not as unknown and obscure as the ones currently featured for puzzles, so I will think it will certainly get more difficult for puzzlers to be able to solve puzzles now and in the future which may explain why so few of the newer members seem to be sticking around.
I think deliberately making puzzles ridiculously difficult or unsolvable is an mistake, this forum is partially an educational tool and If the puzzle cars are extremely difficult or impossible to solve how will anyone ever know what they were in the future?
-
I think deliberately making puzzles ridiculously difficult or unsolvable is an mistake, this forum is partially an educational tool and If the puzzle cars are extremely difficult or impossible to solve how will anyone ever know what they were in the future?
I don't think it's a good idea to assign different point value to different sources... there is already the rookie/expert/pro classification to have the easier puzzles solved by new members and harder puzzles for veteran puzzler...
But I think it would be a great idea to set a time limit for a puzzle life... when it's unsolved after, for instance, 2 years, the solution would be revealed and who started the puzzle recieve a point (or more...).
I think I have read a similar proposal on an old thread somewhere on AP...
-
Yes, Wayne is right that many of today's puzzles are much harder for the Pros to solve than they used to be, as the pool of later rare cars is now getting depleted as so many have been posted already. It's a problem which has been discussed on several occasions here: how to create more involvement for the Pros, as we do lose some once they reach 200 pts and then can't progress. I've thought about simply giving 2 pts for solving a Pro puzzle, but I really don't think that would make much difference (and of course Pro puzzles are not necessarily solved by Pros!)
Personally I try to source 98% of my puzzles from the 'Net as this is after all an Internet-based game and posting puzzles from very obscure British magazines is not really much of a game for, say, an Argentinian member.. But I still do use magazines when I get fed up with puzzles it's taken me hours to find get solved in minutes!
It's a problem to which we'd love to hear suggested solutions.
-
This thread is becoming interesting, and could be a chance to resolve the future of the site. I know how and why the thread started, and a sort of sub-thread has commenced which is about the direction of AP which might be for the benefit of all. We need new members who "stick around", and this is the ideal opportunity for all members to have a say, and proffer their suggestions.
Here's one from me - how about all members who reach Expert level being under an obligation to post at least, say, 6 new puzzles a month. I realise that not everybody has as much time as others to spend on AP (although I manage it, and I've got 2 jobs and a household to manage, although that might be a reflection on the OCD I seem to have acquired since joining AP), but surely 6 puzzles isn't beyond anyone?
These comments we've made about running out of marques does have some substance, but a quick glance at random at Georgano reveals scores of names we haven't used yet. It's just a case of finding a suitable image.
-
Here's one from me - how about all members who reach Expert level being under an obligation to post at least, say, 6 new puzzles a month. I realise that not everybody has as much time as others to spend on AP (although I manage it, and I've got 2 jobs and a household to manage, although that might be a reflection on the OCD I seem to have acquired since joining AP), but surely 6 puzzles isn't beyond anyone?
I don't agree with it... a site like AP cannot live if the members are obliged to do something... but maybe an incentive could be added for members who add more puzzles...
-
What about adding new ways to get the points?
I mean... IMO AP should encourage the personal knowledge above the research skills...
So... what I have in mind is a random "fast" puzzle which appear when you are on AP... the car is a car already solved on AP, and you have 10 seconds to identify it... if you do it right you gain a point...
-
So many replies and so little time to answer...
Thank you all, I think we arrived at some conclusions:
you all support us in this new strategy to fight cheaters.
If puzzlers want to be 'safe' they should use modified pictures or scans from books\mags\etc.
Nothing is going to change in the way the game is going to be played.
There should be no fear of anything: if you know the car but can't explain or you won't remember, it doesn't matter.
@zerk: What do you gentlemen think of using PMs as the means of asking and answering the questions as to search method? Putting the question in the body of the puzzle itself is faintly damning, and the answer may reveal an internet source that someone prefers to keep to themselves. We could simply post, "PM sent" upon receiving a correct puzzle answer, then the PM text would say "Congratulations! Now for the point, how in hell did you do that?"
That is perfect, of course.
@popoid: you are probalby going too far: Having said all this, I will continue to abide by the rules, and submit to the audits, if required, but if said audits become onerous I'm gone. Perhaps it is an American thing, but I still believe that one is innocent until proven guilty, and one should not have to prove innocence.
I used to do like you do, solve all puzzles starting from the Rookie section and then copy the prepared answer few seconds after it's moved, if I'm logged in. (now, with so many skilled experts, I can't do it anymore because they all end before ;D and time is less and less).
I agree what you (and others) stated: it's a game among gentlemen.
...but not fools ;). If any puzzler tells me: I knew it before because I knew it, like we said, I believe his word.
If you are looking for a piece for your coffee machine, contact a seller of those pieces and in his website you find a 'selfbuilt' car the company built in the 60s and there is no other source in the world where you can find it (except SBI) and the puzzle get solved within few minutes, I still believe his word, but I will have a personal idea about...and other puzzlers too. Nobody will be ever be banned upon 'ideas' and there will not be an unpleasant witch-hunt, but a cheater will know that we are not sitting and looking.
It will never be onerous and look at the bright side: there is an additional pleasure in revealing how smart you are. ;D
@WayneB: the point system you suggest, I'm afraid can't work but it doesn't mean you can not decide if one of your puzzles deserves more than 1 point. It's been done before, if you think it's worth, a puzzler can award more points for his puzzles but, again, it doesn't require a specific rule.
Another thing to take into account is that in the early days of this forum, puzzles must have been easier to solve as the vehicles pictured were not as unknown and obscure as the ones currently featured for puzzles, so I will think it will certainly get more difficult for puzzlers to be able to solve puzzles now and in the future which may explain why so few of the newer members seem to be sticking around.
I think deliberately making puzzles ridiculously difficult or unsolvable is an mistake, this forum is partially an educational tool and If the puzzle cars are extremely difficult or impossible to solve how will anyone ever know what they were in the future?
I agree to the 1st part, obviously once the most known sources have been dried, the puzzles are always more challenging.
About the 2nd part, I think if you want to solve a puzzle, you can always do it just asking and guessing. In the end, if the puzzler want to have it solved, he will find a way to lead you toward the solution.
I have some puzzles quite hard still out there. If you do not have my source, they are quite hard. I try to figure out how you can find it and try to point you there. It's up to you to pick my clues.
@Iluvatar. You are right, we already discussed about the time limit and it can't be imposed. I personally do not want to have puzzles remaining there for ages and I prefer to play hangman to let you solve them...but it's my personal view.
To award a point to the poster of impossible puzzles is risky: if I do not 'help' you in some of my puzzles and you do not have my source, it will be almost impossible. If I know that I'll get a point for that, why bother? I know it's not all about points after all and I'd like to see also the divulgative and educational side of this place.
Here's one from me - how about all members who reach Expert level being under an obligation to post at least, say, 6 new puzzles a month. I realise that not everybody has as much time as others to spend on AP (although I manage it, and I've got 2 jobs and a household to manage, although that might be a reflection on the OCD I seem to have acquired since joining AP), but surely 6 puzzles isn't beyond anyone?
I don't agree with it... a site like AP cannot live if the members are obliged to do something... but maybe an incentive could be added for members who add more puzzles...
:thumbsup:
-
I'm going to respond very briefly, because I don't feel very concerned by the subject, having solved about zero puzzle the last two years.
Yet, if anyone asks me how I solved this or that one, I'll be glad to try to answer. Try only, because there is little chance that I remember, months after that.
As for GSBI, when I first heard of it by a member who admitted he had solved some of mine this way, of course I wondered how it worked… but only understood quite recently. I am a little slow, maybe. The reason? I had bookmarked "Google advanced image search" in my bookmark bar, because this is how I make all my image research….. But it's a page where the little camera doesn't appear. So I quickly gave up.
Anyway, what would have been the fun?
-
We are very mindful of the threat to our existence from Google Search by Image, which continues to be used by a small number of members to gain points to which they are not entitled.
I am certainly against that 'audit' idea.
I don’t think it will make a difference for all the reasons explained before. A cheater is a cheater and will always find a way out, while honest players might suffer from that rule.
I can remember a lot of occurrences in which I might not have been able to give a good answer to an audit. Why? Because I had been searching for six to ten completely different cars during the same time period and could not remember the keywords I used on Google. Or because I just had a feeling or souvenir that proved completely right. Or because I was just being lucky. For instance, I can remember finding one puzzle car while I was searching for a totally different one...
Frankly, I am getting a bit weary at seeing good people whose honesty could be potentially challenged because of cheaters, especially when I believe that there are much more good people than bad people.
This is why I am genuinely wondering if the existence of Autopuzzle.com is really at such a risk because of cheaters? Could the editors tell us the number of ‘cheaters’ that was banned in the past, as well as the number of currently suspected ones, as opposed to the total number of members?
-
We'll I don't use the image search and never have, but if anyone asked for the thought process used in the last puzzle I solved (wicker wonder) it was a random guess based on the previous answers, which then resulted in a load of searching to try and find the builder....
Ask me to quantify that a few weeks later and not a chance.
I can see it is a problem for some people with those cheating, but you can't stop them no matter how hard you try. It is the same both on and offline. I generally use my own photos for puzzles but have had an occurrence when someone used one of my photos from a website for a puzzle (that was a very easy point though).
So in that case do I need to prove it was one of my own photographs?
Either you need to be very draconian and insist on proof for everything or you have to accept people may cheat and nothing can really be done about it.
I have over 25000 indexed photos on my computer, even if someone does a directory listing and screenprints it that can be faked, just because a picture exists in a folder with an old creation date doesn't mean it wasn't put there five minutes ago and the metadata faked. That is very easy to do with a few simple tools - if you do a search they can be found in less than a second.
Giles
-
I'd like to explain better this whole idea:
Cheaters will keep cheating, we won't stop them in this way.
True, but we do not want to let pass the idea we are totally unable to fight back, not to defeat them but just to expose theyr silly behaviour
Sometimes I can't explain how I found a puzzle because: I just knew it, I had a general feeling that pointed me in the right direction, or because that's too complicated or because I don't remember, etc etc
If someone will ask you how did you find a puzzle, you can answer as you please: going deeply into the process that lead you there, or just saying 'I knew it' or 'I found it looking for something else'. There is not a good way to reply, your integrity or honesty will never be questioned and you can have us all rely on your word alone if you want.
How can we decide or question anyone integrity?
No one will doubt anyone's reply. Each one of you can answer what he likes to. There will never be a 'commission' looking into your replies to spot a cheater!
And if the cheater keep cheating and produce fake explainations?
He will keep scoring useless points...and probably he will start to feel the vacuum of his game.
What's the utility of it, then?
If I spend hours looking for puzzles to post and they get solved in a flash, I could be frustrated expecially if I have the feeling someone could cheat to solve them. I could ask how did they knew it, but as some of you already said, it was not a pleasant feeling to be questioned. Now, we all are accepting to be questioned and we can feel free to 'just ask' without hurting anyone. It will not mean someone is suspected or there will be further investigations.
It's like a random antidrug test: if I tell you we will do random tests, you can pass them easily if you know how, but 1. you won't be offended if you are clean because you understand the meaning of that random test, 2. you probably will think twice if you are dirty. 3. you all know that we are dealing with this issue.
-
Could the editors tell us the number of ‘cheaters’ that was banned in the past, as well as the number of currently suspected ones, as opposed to the total number of members?
?
-
It's like a random antidrug test: if I tell you we will do random tests, you can pass them easily if you know how, but 1. you won't be offended if you are clean because you understand the meaning of that random test, 2. you probably will think twice if you are dirty. 3. you all know that we are dealing with this issue.[/i]
In an antidrug test the result is true or false! There is no human arbitration.
That's really what makes me uncomfortable with that rule. Especially when dealing with people whose native tongue is not English, which means that an answer might not be fully understood or, worst, misinterpreted.
-
Could the editors tell us the number of ‘cheaters’ that was banned in the past, as well as the number of currently suspected ones, as opposed to the total number of members?
?
Er, no! It's only a very small number; most here are top-notch puzzlers.
Are you actually French Alex or an Englishman trapped domiciled on the wrong side of the Channel?! I ask because your English is perfect!
P.S. I'm only joking; actually I love France!
-
It's like a random antidrug test: if I tell you we will do random tests, you can pass them easily if you know how, but 1. you won't be offended if you are clean because you understand the meaning of that random test, 2. you probably will think twice if you are dirty. 3. you all know that we are dealing with this issue.[/i]
In an antidrug test the result is true or false! There is no human arbitration.
That's really what makes me uncomfortable with that rule. Especially when dealing with people whose native tongue is not English, which means that an answer might not be fully understood or, worst, misinterpreted.
It was an example.
The antidrug test has got 1 aim: to find and punish the dirty ones.
This rule has a different aim, not to find a cheater by analizing his replies and as stated before, we won't ban anyone with this rule.
We are asking you to be patient if we ask you how did you find a car, just like that. You don't have to create a convincing story or be afraid if you can't explain...we are among gentlemen and your word will be trusted.
The example was in this direction: if I tell you I'm going to make this test you can probably find a way to pass it (I don't know if it's technically possible, let's pretend it is) and it's fine for me because I want this 3 results: 1. you won't be offended if you are clean because you understand the meaning of that random test, 2. you probably will think twice if you are dirty. 3. you all know that we are dealing with this issue.
-
I try to propose photos which are not found by Google search
But I think that it would be necessary to finalize a method to modify photos
Have the right to invert photos or other methods ?
-
I try to propose photos which are not found by Google search
But I think that it would be necessary to finalize a method to modify photos
Have the right to invert photos or other methods ?
The photos can be modified in certain ways to obscure the identify but not changed into something they are not, which inverting would do.
For instance blanking out a radiator grille is one thing (it's OK) but superimposing the grille from another car on to the puzzle picture is not OK.
-
.... which is clearly delineated in the rules, which are listed at the top of every puzzle thread. Upstream in this here thread, one or more of us are taken to task for being a noodge, by reminding members of the rules in our puzzle posting, as it may or may not imply everyone who reads such reminders is being accused of cheating.
Given the "is it OK to invert pictures" question, perhaps we don't noodge enough. ;)
-
So... I think that the only solution to avoid the problem is to post puzzles that cannot be found via GSBI... and the best way to do it is to search the picture in this way before posting the puzzle... if Google find the picture... it's time to use some graphic camouflage on the image... until google does not find it anymore...
Agreed - ever since this service from Google or Bing was available, I have tried my test my puzzle-pic in advance.
Only if it was not to be found, I have placed it here.