Dazed & Confused: A Large-Scale Real-World User Study of reCAPTCHAv2

Since about 2003, captchas have been widely used as a barrier against bots, while simultaneously annoying great multitudes of users worldwide. As their use grew, techniques to defeat or bypass captchas kept improving, while captchas themselves evolved in terms of sophistication and diversity, becoming increasingly difficult to solve for both bots and humans. Given this long-standing and still-ongoing arms race, it is important to investigate usability, solving performance, and user perceptions of modern captchas. In this work, we do so via a large-scale (over 3, 600 distinct users) 13-month real-world user study and post-study survey. The study, conducted at a large public university, was based on a live account creation and password recovery service with currently prevalent captcha type: reCAPTCHAv2. Results show that, with more attempts, users improve in solving checkbox challenges. For website developers and user study designers, results indicate that the website context directly influences (with statistically significant differences) solving time between password recovery and account creation. We consider the impact of participants' major and education level, showing that certain majors exhibit better performance, while, in general, education level has a direct impact on solving time. Unsurprisingly, we discover that participants find image challenges to be annoying, while checkbox challenges are perceived as easy. We also show that, rated via System Usability Scale (SUS), image tasks are viewed as "OK", while checkbox tasks are viewed as "good". We explore the cost and security of reCAPTCHAv2 and conclude that it has an immense cost and no security. Overall, we believe that this study's results prompt a natural conclusion: reCAPTCHAv2 and similar reCAPTCHA technology should be deprecated

Advancing a Network of Safety Measures in the Bering Strait Region: Now is the Time

Climate change impacts have been particularly acute in the Arctic, where warming has led to the loss of seasonal sea ice, among other impacts. As Arctic waters experience longer ice-free seasons and reduced sea ice extent and thickness, vessel traffic in the maritime Arctic has increased. Experts forecast this growth trend will continue and accelerate. Increasing vessel traffic brings threats to the Arctic region, its people, and its wildlife. These include increased air, water, and subsea noise pollution and the potential for a large oil and/or fuel spill. While authorities have put in place some management measures designed to reduce these threats, more action is needed to safeguard the region. Impacts from increasing shipping in the Arctic region can be further mitigated by both Arctic-specific rules and best practices and broader changes to global-scale shipping practices. More broadly, improvements to governance structures are needed to better address the multiple and overlapping threats to the Arctic region. At the same time, these changes can promote full and meaningful participation by Indigenous residents of the Arctic with respect to the identification, design, and implementation of management measures that may affect their region. On a global scale, reducing greenhouse gas emissions is critically important for the future of the Arctic and its peoples and wildlife—and for the ocean as a whole

An Empirical Study & Evaluation of Modern CAPTCHAs

For nearly two decades, CAPTCHAs have been widely used as a means of protection against bots. Throughout the years, as their use grew, techniques to defeat or bypass CAPTCHAs have continued to improve. Meanwhile, CAPTCHAs have also evolved in terms of sophistication and diversity, becoming increasingly difficult to solve for both bots (machines) and humans. Given this long-standing and still-ongoing arms race, it is critical to investigate how long it takes legitimate users to solve modern CAPTCHAs, and how they are perceived by those users. In this work, we explore CAPTCHAs in the wild by evaluating users' solving performance and perceptions of unmodified currently-deployed CAPTCHAs. We obtain this data through manual inspection of popular websites and user studies in which 1,400 participants collectively solved 14,000 CAPTCHAs. Results show significant differences between the most popular types of CAPTCHAs: surprisingly, solving time and user perception are not always correlated. We performed a comparative study to investigate the effect of experimental context -- specifically the difference between solving CAPTCHAs directly versus solving them as part of a more natural task, such as account creation. Whilst there were several potential confounding factors, our results show that experimental context could have an impact on this task, and must be taken into account in future CAPTCHA studies. Finally, we investigate CAPTCHA-induced user task abandonment by analyzing participants who start and do not complete the task.Comment: Accepted at USENIX Security 202

Does evidence influence policy? Resource allocation and the Indigenous Burden of Disease study

Objective The Indigenous Burden of Disease (IBoD) report is the most comprehensive assessment of Indigenous disease burden in Australia. The aim of the present study was to investigate the potential effect of the IBoD report on Australian Indigenous health policy, service expenditure and research funding. Findings have significance for understanding factors that may influence Indigenous health policy. Methods The potential effect of the IBoD report was considered by: (1) conducting a text search of pertinent documents published by the federal government, Council of Australian Governments and the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia (NHMRC) and observing the quantity and quality of references to IBoD; (2) examining data on government Indigenous healthcare expenditure for trends consistent with the findings and policy implications of the IBoD report; and (3) examining NHMRC Indigenous grant allocation trends consistent with the findings and policy implications of the IBoD report. Results Of 110 government and NHMRC documents found, IBoD was cited in 27. Immediately after publication of the IBoD report, federal and state governments increased Indigenous health spending (relative to non-Indigenous), notably for community health and public health at the state level. Expenditure on Indigenous hospital separations for chronic diseases also increased. These changes are broadly consistent with the findings of the IBoD report on the significance of chronic disease and the need to address certain risk factors. However, there is no evidence that such changes had a causal connection with the IBoD study. After publication of the IBoD report, changes in NHMRC Indigenous research funding showed little consistency with the findings of the IBoD report. Conclusions The present study found only indirect and inconsistent correlational evidence of the potential influence of the IBoD report on Indigenous health expenditure and research funding. Further assessment of the potential influence of the IBoD report on Indigenous health policy will require more targeted research, including interviews with key informants involved in developing health policy. What is known about the topic? There are currently no publications that consider the potential effed of the IBoD study on Indigenous health expenditure and research funding. What does this paper add? This paper offers the first consideration of the potential effect of the IBoD report. It contains analyses of data from readily available sources, examining national expenditures on Indigenous health and NHMRC Indigenous research, before and after the publication of the IBoD report. What are the implications for practitioners? The paper is relevant to analysts interested in drivers of Indigenous health policy. Although it finds correlations between the release of the IBoD report and some subsequent health spending decisions, other factors should be investigated to better understand the complexity of processes that drive government efforts to improve Indigenous health

Apunipima baby basket program: a retrospective cost study

Background: The Baby Basket initiative was developed by Apunipima Cape York Health Council (ACYHC) to address poor maternal and child health (MCH) in Cape York, the northernmost region of Queensland. While positive outcomes for Indigenous MCH programs are reported in the literature, few studies have a strong evidence base or employ a sound methodological approach to evaluation. The aim of the cost study is to identify the resources required to deliver the Baby Basket program in the remote communities of Cape York. It represents an initial step in the economic evaluation of the Apunipima Baby Basket program. The aim of this study was to report whether the current program represents an effective use of scarce resources. Method: The cost study was conducted from the perspective of the health providers and reflects the direct resources required to deliver the Baby Basket program to 170 women across 11 communities represented by ACYHC. A flow diagram informed by interviews with ACYHC staff, administrative documents and survey feedback was used to map the program pathway and measure resource use. Monetary values, in 2013 Australian dollars, were applied to the resources used to deliver the Baby Basket program for one year. Results: The total cost of delivering the Baby Basket progam to 170 participants in Cape York was $148,642 or approximately,$874 per participant. The analysis allowed for the cost of providing the Baby Baskets to remote locations and the time for health workers to engage with women and thereby encourage a relationship with the health service. Routinely collected data showed improved engagement between expectant women and the health service during the life of the program. Conclusion: The Apunipima Baby Basket cost study identifies the resources required to deliver this program in remote communities of Cape York and provides a framework that will support prospective data collection of more specific outcome data, for future cost-effectiveness analyses and cost-benefit analyses. An investment of $874 per Baby Basket participant was associated with improved engagement with the health service, an important factor in maternal and child health

Assessing the impact of the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement on Australian and global medicines policy

On 1 January 2005, a controversial trade agreement entered into force between Australia and the United States. Though heralded by the parties as facilitating the removal of barriers to free trade (in ways not achievable in multilateral fora), it also contained many trade-restricting intellectual property provisions and others uniquely related to altering pharmaceutical regulation and public health policy in Australia. The latter appear to have particularly focused on the world-respected process of federal government reimbursement after expert cost-effectiveness evaluation, popularly known as the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme ('PBS'). It remains uncertain what sort of impacts – if any – the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement ('AUSFTA') will have on PBS processes such as reference pricing and their important role in facilitating equitable and affordable access to essential medicines. This is now the field of inquiry for a major three year Australian Research Council ('ARC')-funded study bringing together a team of senior researchers in regulatory theory from the Australian National University and pharmacoeconomics from the University of Newcastle. The project proposes to monitor, assess and analyse the real and potential impacts of the AUSFTA in this area, providing Australian policy-makers with continuing expertise and options. To the extent that the AUSFTA medicines provisions may represent an important precedent in a global strategy by industry on cost-effectiveness evaluation of pharmaceuticals, the study will also be of great interest to policy makers in other jurisdictions

What was the impact of a participatory research project in Australian Indigenous primary healthcare services? Applying a comprehensive framework for assessing translational health research to Lessons for the Best

Objectives To (1) apply the Framework to Assess the Impact from Translational health research (FAIT) to Lessons from the Best to Better the Rest (LFTB), (2) report on impacts from LFTB and (3) assess the feasibility and outcomes from a retrospective application of FAIT. Setting Three Indigenous primary healthcare (PHC) centres in the Northern Territory, Australia; project coordinating centre distributed between Townsville, Darwin and Cairns and the broader LFTB learning community across Australia. Participants LFTB research team and one representative from each PHC centre. Primary and secondary outcome measures Impact reported as (1) quantitative metrics within domains of benefit using a modified Payback Framework, (2) a cost-consequence analysis given a return on investment was not appropriate and (3) a narrative incorporating qualitative evidence of impact. Data were gathered through in-depth stakeholder interviews and a review of project documentation, outputs and relevant websites. Results LFTB contributed to knowledge advancement in Indigenous PHC service delivery; enhanced existing capacity of health centre staff, researchers and health service users; enhanced supportive networks for quality improvement; and used a strengths-based approach highly valued by health centres. LFTB also leveraged between $A1.4 and$A1.6 million for the subsequent Leveraging Effective Ambulatory Practice (LEAP) Project to apply LFTB learnings to resource development and creation of a learning community to empower striving PHC centres. Conclusion Retrospective application of FAIT to LFTB, although not ideal, was feasible. Prospective application would have allowed Indigenous community perspectives to be included. Greater appreciation of the full benefit of LFTB including a measure of return on investment will be possible when LEAP is complete. Future assessments of impact need to account for the limitations of fully capturing impact when intermediate/final impacts have not yet been realised and capture

Encouraging translation and assessing impact of the Centre for Research Excellence in Integrated Quality Improvement: Rationale and protocol for a research impact assessment

Introduction: There is growing recognition among health researchers and funders that the wider benefits of research such as economic, social and health impacts ought to be assessed and valued alongside academic outputs such as peer-reviewed papers. Research translation needs to increase and the pathways to impact ought to be more transparent. These processes are particularly pertinent to the Indigenous health sector given continued concerns that Indigenous communities are over-researched with little corresponding improvement in health outcomes. This paper describes the research protocol of a mixed methods study to apply FAIT (Framework to Assess the Impact from Translational health research) to the Centre for Research Excellence in Integrated Quality Improvement (CRE-IQI). FAIT will be applied to five selected CRE-IQI Flagship projects to encourage research translation and assess the wider impact of that research. Methods and analysis: Phase I will develop a modified programme logic model for each Flagship project including identifying process, output and impact metrics so progress can be monitored. A scoping review will inform potential benefits. In phase II, programme logic models will be updated to account for changes in the research pathways over time. Audit and feedback will be used to encourage research translation and collect evidence of achievement of any process, output and interim impacts. In phase III, three proven methodologies for measuring research impact—Payback, economic assessment and narratives—will be applied. Data on the application of FAIT will be collected and analysed to inform and improve FAIT’s performance