Skill-Testing Questions and Captcha

July 19, 2011 at 7:46 am 2 comments

All lotteries have three major components:

  • There is a value associated with the prize;
  • The organization running the sweepstakes benefits financially; and,
  • The winner is chosen at random.

To avoid being an illegal private lottery, at least one of the three components must be removed. Canadian sweepstakes law requires that the third component (winners chosen at random) be removed. That is, the sponsoring organization cannot use pure luck alone to determine who wins. There must be some element of skill involved.

Hence the disclaimer on lotteries open to residents of Canada, such as the following from the Bizrate sweepstakes:

If a Canadian resident wins a prize, that person must also answer correctly within a 5 minute time period a mathematical skill-testing question (STQ)…

Apparently, Canadian courts have determined that a mathematical expression containing at least three binary operators is sufficient to qualify as an STQ. Hence, a person whose name is chosen at random might have to determine the value of the following before being awarded the prize:

8 × 6 – 5 + 9

The expression above is an actual STQ that was used in a Tim Horton’s contest a few years ago. (A woman with a learning disability gave the incorrect answer of 51. When she appealed, she was given a second chance, and they gave her the same question. Again, she answered 51. Amid much protest, Tim Horton’s eventually relented and awarded the prize to the woman anyway, though it’s unclear to me how they got around the STQ requirement.)

Similar STQ’s are now being used as captchas on web sites. I was presented with the following math question when submitting a comment to a site the other day:

Captcha Original

I really thought they missed a golden opportunity, though, so I submitted a second comment with the following image attached:

Captcha Revised

Entry filed under: Uncategorized. Tags: , , , , .

Smooth Operators If This is What Hades is Like, We Better Change Our Ways

2 Comments Add your own

  • 1. JimsMaher  |  July 20, 2011 at 12:09 pm

    Regarding the rewarding of the lottery prize, it seems to me someone had a heart. The law is really absurd given the accepted method of bypassing it, so to deny someone from winning what is otherwise (practically speaking) truly random, it’s absurd. Also, the irony is astounding to test someone using math in order to win a game of staggering chances.

    Besides, she was only off by two.

    Reply
  • 2. CFinley  |  July 21, 2011 at 3:07 pm

    Off by one, you mean.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


About MJ4MF

The Math Jokes 4 Mathy Folks blog is an online extension to the book Math Jokes 4 Mathy Folks. The blog contains jokes submitted by readers, new jokes discovered by the author, details about speaking appearances and workshops, and other random bits of information that might be interesting to the strange folks who like math jokes.

MJ4MF (offline version)

Math Jokes 4 Mathy Folks is available from Amazon, Borders, Barnes & Noble, NCTM, Robert D. Reed Publishers, and other purveyors of exceptional literature.

Past Posts

July 2011
M T W T F S S
« Jun   Aug »
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Enter your email address to subscribe to the MJ4MF blog and receive new posts via email.

Join 232 other followers

Visitor Locations

free counters

%d bloggers like this: