The title kind of makes it appear far less of a problem than it actually is, because according to the article, hCaptcha made multiple rude and evidence-free accusations of lying despite the author actually being blind.

Some captchas are getting pretty discriminatory, not everyone lives in the West and can identify the objects they are asking you to. Another recent one sticks out where they asked me to pick a shape as the same number of conoids on screen. If you ask people on a street what a conoids I bet a significant amount will give you blank looks

Also at least now I know some people call those markings crosswalks

I am also blind. hCaptcha is the worst. Their stupid cookie expires so I have to go through their getting an email to set the cookie almost every time I encounter one. It's a horrendous UX, especially when using different devices and browsers. I imagine others just give up instead of dealing with the crap. They shouldn't use the word accessibility when their whole service is the exact opposite.

The bots can probably solve them easier than blind people anyway, or they can outsource them to third world workers for next to nothing. E.G. Anticaptcha [0]:

> Starting from 0.5USD per 1000 images, depending on your daily spending volume

[0] https://anti-captcha.com/

The author was essentially too smart to be blind.

Lesson 1 about competing with Google should be "don't be even more disrespectful to your users than Google is". Otherwise people will just use Google.

Relying on the goodwill of a small number of "never-Googlers" to carry your business, in spite of the way you do business, is not a path to success.

While hCaptcha trashes its reputation, the rest of the world will go on using reCaptcha and not giving the faintest whiff of a fart about hCaptcha's existence.

(Side note: the spelling is "intentional", not "intensional". Think "intent" + "-tion" + "-al", not "in-" + "tension" + "-al").