#FactCheck- Viral video of UP Police patrolling on e-rickshaw is AI-generated

CAPTCHA, or the Completely Automated Public Turing Test to Tell Computers and Humans Apart function, is an image or distorted text that users have to identify or interpret to prove they are human. 2007 marked the inception of CAPTCHA, and Google developed its free service called reCAPTCHA, one of the most commonly used technologies to tell computers apart from humans. CAPTCHA protects websites from spam and abuse by using tests considered easy for humans but were supposed to be difficult for bots to solve. 

But, now this has changed. With AI becoming more and more sophisticated, it is now capable of solving CAPTCHA tests at a rate that is more accurate than humans, rendering them increasingly ineffective. This raises the question of whether CAPTCHA is still effective as a detection tool with the advancements of AI.

CAPTCHA Evolution: From 2007 Till Now

CAPTCHA has evolved through various versions to keep bots at bay. reCAPTCHA v1 relied on distorted text recognition, v2 introduced image-based tasks and behavioural analysis, and v3 operated invisibly, assigning risk scores based on user interactions. While these advancements improved user experience and security, AI now solves CAPTCHA with 96% accuracy, surpassing humans (50-86%). Bots can mimic human behaviour, undermining CAPTCHA’s effectiveness and raising the question: is it still a reliable tool for distinguishing real people from bots?

Smarter Bots and Their Rise

AI advancements like machine learning, deep learning and neural networks have developed at a very fast pace in the past decade, making it easier for bots to bypass CAPTCHA. They allow the bots to process and interpret the CAPTCHA types like text and images with almost human-like behaviour. Some examples of AI developments against bots are OCR or Optical Character Recognition. The earlier versions of CAPTCHA relied on distorted text: AI because of this tech is able to recognise and decipher the distorted text, making CAPTCHA useless. AI is trained on huge datasets which allows Image Recognition by identifying the objects that are specific to the question asked. These bots can mimic human habits and patterns by Behavioural Analysis and therefore fool the CAPTCHA. 

To defeat CAPTCHA, attackers have been known to use Adversarial Machine Learning, which refers to AI models trained specifically to defeat CAPTCHA. They collect CAPTCHA datasets and answers and create an AI that can predict correct answers. The implications that CAPTCHA failures have on platforms can range from fraud to spam to even cybersecurity breaches or cyberattacks. 

CAPTCHA vs Privacy: GDPR and DPDP

GDPR and the DPDP Act emphasise protecting personal data, including online identifiers like IP addresses and cookies. Both frameworks mandate transparency when data is transferred internationally, raising compliance concerns for reCAPTCHA, which processes data on Google’s US servers. Additionally, reCAPTCHA's use of cookies and tracking technologies for risk scoring may conflict with the DPDP Act's broad definition of data. The lack of standardisation in CAPTCHA systems highlights the urgent need for policymakers to reevaluate regulatory approaches.

CyberPeace Analysis: The Future of Human Verification

CAPTCHA, once a cornerstone of online security, is losing ground as AI outperforms humans in solving these challenges with near-perfect accuracy. Innovations like invisible CAPTCHA and behavioural analysis provided temporary relief, but bots have adapted, exploiting vulnerabilities and undermining their effectiveness. This decline demands a shift in focus. 

Emerging alternatives like AI-based anomaly detection, biometric authentication, and blockchain verification hold promise but raise ethical concerns like privacy, inclusivity, and surveillance. The battle against bots isn’t just about tools but it’s about reimagining trust and security in a rapidly evolving digital world.

AI is clearly winning the CAPTCHA war, but the real victory will be designing solutions that balance security, user experience and ethical responsibility. It’s time to embrace smarter, collaborative innovations to secure a human-centric internet.

References

• https://www.business-standard.com/technology/tech-news/bot-detection-no-longer-working-just-wait-until-ai-agents-come-along-124122300456_1.html 
• https://www.milesrote.com/blog/ai-defeating-recaptcha-the-evolving-battle-between-bots-and-web-security 
• https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/10/24/1081139/captchas-ai-websites-computing/‍
• https://datadome.co/guides/captcha/recaptcha-gdpr/

Introduction

In September 2024, the Australian government announced the  Communications Legislation Amendment (Combatting Misinformation and Disinformation) Bill 2024 ( CLA Bill 2024 hereon), to provide new powers to the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA), the statutory regulatory body for Australia's communications and media infrastructure, to combat online misinformation and disinformation. It proposed allowing the ACMA to hold digital platforms accountable for the “seriously harmful mis- and disinformation” being spread on their platforms and their response to it, while also balancing freedom of expression. However, the Bill was subsequently withdrawn, primarily over concerns regarding the possibility of censorship by the government. This development is reflective of the global contention on the balance between misinformation regulation and freedom of speech. 

Background and Key Features of the Bill

According to the BBC’s Global Minds Survey of 2023, nearly 73% of Australians struggled to identify fake news and AI-generated misinformation. There has been a substantial rise in misinformation on platforms like Facebook, Twitter, and TikTok since the COVID-19 pandemic, especially during major events like the bushfires of 2020 and the 2022 federal elections. The government’s campaign against misinformation was launched against this background, with the launch of The Australian Code of Practice on Disinformation and Misinformation in 2021. The main provisions of the CLA Bill, 2024 were: 

1. Core Transparency Obligations of Digital Media Platforms: Publishing current media literacy plans,  risk assessment reports, and policies or information on their approach to addressing mis- and disinformation. The ACMA would also be allowed to make additional rules regarding complaints and dispute-handling processes.
2. Information Gathering and Record-Keeping Powers: The ACMA would form rules allowing it to gather consistent information across platforms and publish it. However, it would not have been empowered to gather and publish user information except in limited circumstances.
3. Approving Codes and Making Standards: The ACMA would have powers to approve codes developed by the industry and make standards regarding reporting tools, links to authoritative information, support for fact-checking, and demonetisation of disinformation. This would make compliance mandatory for relevant sections of the industry. 
4. Parliamentary Oversight: The transparency obligations, codes approved and standards set by ACMA under the Bill would be subject to parliamentary scrutiny and disallowance. ACMA would be required to report to the Parliament annually. 
5. Freedom of Speech Protections: End-users would not be required to produce information for ACMA unless they are a person providing services to the platform, such as its employees or fact-checkers. Further,  it would not be allowed to call for removing content from platforms unless it involved inauthentic behavior such as bots. 
6. Penalties for Non-Compliance: ACMA would be required to employ a “graduated, proportionate and risk-based approach” to non-compliance and enforcement in the form of formal warnings, remedial directions, injunctions, or significant civil penalties as decided by the courts, subject to review by the Administrative Review Tribunal (ART). No criminal penalties would be imposed.

Key Concerns

• Inadequacy of Freedom of Speech Protections: The biggest contention on this Bill has been regarding the issue of possible censorship, particularly of alternative opinions that are crucial to the health of a democratic system. To protect the freedom of speech, the Bill defined mis- and disinformation, what constitutes “serious harm” (election interference, harming public health, etc.), and what would be excluded from its scope. However, reservations among the Opposition persisted due to the lack of a clear mechanism to protect divergent opinions from the purview of this Bill. 
• Efficacy of Regulatory Measures: Many argue that by allowing the digital platform industry to make its codes, this law lets it self-police. Big Tech companies have no incentive to curb misinformation effectively since their business models allow them to reap financial benefits from the rampant spread of misinformation. Unless there are financial non- or dis- incentives to curb misinformation, Big Tech is not likely to address the situation at war footing.  Thus, this law would run the risk of being toothless. Secondly, the Bill did not require platforms to report on the “prevalence of” false content which, along with other metrics,  is crucial for researchers and legislators to track the efficacy of the current misinformation-curbing practices employed by platforms.  
• Threat of Government Overreach:  The Bill sought to expand the ACMA’s compliance and enforcement powers concerning misinformation and disinformation on online communication platforms by giving it powers to form rules on information gathering, code registration, standard-making powers, and core transparency obligations. However, even though the ACMA as a regulatory authority is answerable to the Parliament, the Bill was unclear in defining limits to these powers. This raised concerns from civil society about potential government overreach in a domain filled with contextual ambiguities regarding information.

Conclusion

While the Communications Legislation Amendment (Combatting Misinformation and Disinformation) Bill sought to equip the ACMA with tools to hold digital platforms accountable and mitigate the harm caused by false information, its critique highlights the complexities of regulating such content without infringing on freedom of speech. Legislations and proposals regarding the matter all over the world are having to contend with this challenge. Globally, legislation and proposals addressing this issue face similar challenges, emphasizing the need for a continuous discourse at the intersection of platform accountability, regulatory restraint, and the protection of diverse viewpoints.

To regulate Big Tech effectively, governments can benefit from adopting a consultative, incremental, and cooperative approach, as exemplified by the European Union’s Digital Services Act 2023. Such a framework provides for a balanced response, fostering accountability while safeguarding democratic freedoms.

Resources

• https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/factsheet-misinformation-disinformation-bill.pdf 
• https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/have-your-say/new-acma-powers-combat-misinformation-and-disinformation 
• https://www.mi-3.com.au/07-02-2024/over-80-australians-feel-they-may-have-fallen-fake-news-says-bbc 
• https://www.hrlc.org.au/news/misinformation-inquiry 
• https://humanrights.gov.au/our-work/legal/submission/combatting-misinformation-and-disinformation-bill-2024 
• https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/what-is-the-misinformation-bill-and-why-has-it-triggered-worries-about-freedom-of-speech/4n3ijebde 
• https://www.hrw.org/report/2023/06/14/no-internet-means-no-work-no-pay-no-food/internet-shutdowns-deny-access-basic#:~:text=The%20Telegraph%20Act%20allows%20authorities,preventing%20incitement%20to%20the%20commission 
• https://www.hrlc.org.au/submissions/2024/11/8/submission-combatting-misinformation?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Media%20Release%20Senate%20Committee%20to%20hear%20evidence%20calling%20for%20Albanese%20Government%20to%20regulate%20and%20hold%20big%20tech%20accountable%20for%20misinformation&utm_content=Media%20Release%20Senate%20Committee%20to%20hear%20evidence%20calling%20for%20Albanese%20Government%20to%20regulate%20and%20hold%20big%20tech%20accountable%20for%20misinformation+Preview+CID_31c6d7200ed9bd2f7f6f596ba2a8b1fb&utm_source=Email%20campaign&utm_term=Read%20the%20Human%20Rights%20Law%20Centres%20submission%20to%20the%20inquiry

‍

Introduction

‍

India officially became part of the US-led Pax Silica project on February 20, 2026, at the India AI Impact Summit in New Delhi. This was a significant milestone in India’s involvement in global technology and supply chain cooperation. India joined a coalition of advanced economies by signing the Pax Silica Declaration in a move aimed at strengthening coordination over technology supply chains on which artificial intelligence, semiconductors, critical minerals and advanced manufacturing rely. The entry of India into the global technology landscape is indicative of India’s growing role in the global technology order and reflects broader shifts in how countries are responding to the geopolitics of silicon and AI infrastructure.

‍

What Is Pax Silica and Why It Matters

‍

The United States Department of State introduced Pax Silica as a strategic program launched in December 2025. It seeks to establish safe, resilient and innovation-driven supply chains for emerging technologies that are the foundations of the AI era. This encompasses activities ranging from mining and refining of rare earths, gallium and germanium to semiconductor manufacturing, the creation of advanced computing hardware and energy infrastructure. The project describes cooperation as a method of reducing what are termed as coercive dependencies on any one supplier or economy, thereby supporting sustained access to building blocks of state-of-the-art technology.

Pax Silica derives its name from the Latin terms for 'peace' and the substrate material of 'silicon', meaning that the coalition aims at achieving stability and prosperity by working together in supply chains of technology. Early signatories were the United States, Japan, South Korea, Australia, the United Kingdom, Israel, Singapore, the Netherlands, Greece, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. India was the twelfth member to sign the declaration.

‍

India’s Strategic Interests in Pax Silica

‍

The move to join Pax Silica is both a diplomatic and economic decision. The incorporation of India into a network led ostensibly by the Western bloc and containing developed economy players in the technological supply chain creates the messaging that it wants to be more deeply integrated into the global high-tech ecosystems. 

India currently relies on importing a large proportion of the chips for its electronics production sector, while its domestic manufacturing capacity remains limited. Pax Silica membership could provide Indian firms with advanced manufacturing equipment, process expertise and joint ventures with their partners, who have already developed the fabrication capabilities.

The signing of the declaration was done by the current Union Minister of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) , the Union Minister, who noted that India is expanding its technological capabilities and future ambitions. He observed that the Indian engineers already play a role in designing advanced semiconductor chips and that the increase in semiconductor capacity will demand a professional workforce. He also emphasised that the availability of international tools and alliances would help accelerate India’s growth in this sector.

Another strategic area is the critical minerals. India is estimated to have significant rare earth reserves, but the resources remain largely underdeveloped. The diversification strategy of Pax Silica in terms of supply and processing routes provides India with an opportunity to have joint ventures and infrastructure projects that could help unlock domestic mineral potential within the country.

‍

Supply Chains, AI, and Geopolitical Context

‍

Pax Silica has emerged within a broader geopolitical and supply chain context rather than as a purely economic initiative. The last few years have placed a strain on global technology supply chains with disruptions caused by pandemics, trade tensions, export controls, and the concentrated control of some components of the value chain. China currently dominates in the refinement of rare earths as well as in a variety of legacy semiconductor manufacturing. The concentration has raised concerns about resilience and strategic autonomy among the technology-producing democracies.

This initiative is based on the premise that a diversified and trusted supply chain will make the economic security of countries participating in Pax Silica more secure in case of a trade embargo or as a tool of political leverage. The voluntary and non-binding framework by the coalition only provides a guide to cooperation instead of a binding commitment, though it highlights an acknowledgement of risk and opportunity in global technology markets.

Such concerns as strategic autonomy and the extent of India’s involvement in the initiative have been expressed by those who criticise it, particularly because the coalition is perceived to be partially designed to respond to Chinese dominance in the most important technological sectors. Some analysts have also suggested that India will have to balance its participation in Pax Silica by taking special care of its own interests and alliances outside this coalition.

‍

Economic and Industrial Implications for India

‍

Joining Pax Silica offers India potential benefits on multiple fronts.

‍

Strengthening Innovation and Manufacturing Ecosystems

‍

India's membership will allow cooperation in semiconductor production, development of advanced computing infrastructure and implementation of AI. The government and industry players could attract investments through partnerships, technology transfer and joint R&D. India’s emerging design and fabrication projects could use a greater international integration in this venture.

‍

Talent and Skills Development

‍

A recurring theme among Indian policymakers is the issue of a skilled workforce. As the world semiconductor and AI sector is expected to need millions of specialists in the next 10 years, India’s large talent pool presents an opportunity to produce local talent that is capable of catering to local demands as well as international supply needs. Initiatives linked to Pax Silica have the potential to establish training pathways and institutional bridges that facilitate workforce preparedness.

‍

Diversification of Supply Partnerships

‍

In the case of India, the diversification of suppliers and partners goes beyond the availability of materials and technologies. It also implies reducing exposure to supply shocks and enhancing resilience in important industries such as consumer electronics, automotive manufacturing, defence systems and digital infrastructure, all of which rely on semiconductors and advanced computing hardware.

‍

Broader Industrial Readiness and Domestic Challenges

‍

India’s participation in Pax Silica highlights the domestic conditions required to support advanced technology manufacturing. A conducive environment will depend on reliable infrastructure, regulatory stability, specialised industrial clusters and sustained policy coordination across government and industry. Semiconductor and AI hardware production are resource-intensive, requiring significant energy, water and chemical management, making environmental safeguards and sustainable industrial planning essential to prevent long-term ecological strain.

At the same time, India faces gaps in its human resource development ecosystem. While engineering talent is abundant, specialised training in semiconductor fabrication, materials science and advanced manufacturing remains limited. Additionally, the relative lack of applied research and development initiatives aimed at reducing technological and financial risks may constrain large-scale industrial expansion, underscoring the need for stronger industry–academia collaboration and targeted innovation support.

‍

Conclusion: A Strategic Step into the AI Era

‍

India’s formal entry into the Pax Silica initiative at the 2026 India AI Impact Summit reflects a thoughtful recalibration of its global technology engagement. By aligning with a coalition aimed at securing the supply chains that make modern digital economies possible, India has signalled its intent to be more than just a consumer of technology. It seeks to help shape the infrastructure, partnerships and norms that will define the next generation of AI, semiconductors and critical technologies.

While questions around strategic autonomy and long-term dependencies remain important considerations, Pax Silica offers India access to networks, capabilities and collaborative frameworks that can accelerate its semiconductor ambitions and broaden its role in the global tech order. The move underscores how technology cooperation today increasingly interacts with geopolitics, economic strategy and national aspirations for growth and innovation.

Sources

‍

• https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/technology/tech-news/what-is-pax-silica-and-why-does-india-joining-the-ai-supply-chain-alliance-matter/articleshow/128594775.cms
• https://paxsilica.org/f/pax-silica-securing-the-foundations-of-the-ai-era
• https://www.businesstoday.in/india/story/ai-impact-summit-2026-india-set-to-join-us-led-pax-silica-today-517167-2026-02-20
• https://www.business-standard.com/india-news/pax-silica-india-joins-us-supply-chain-initiative-ai-impact-summit-2026-126022000339_1.html

‍