The article states that Animoto use "honeypot fields and timestamp analysis" instead of CAPTCHAs, which they claim has been effective to date. What do you think of this?
I use honeypot fields myself and they stop a ton of spam submissions. I'm sure timestamp analysis can be very effective too. I'm totally a fan. But are there bots smart enough to defeat it? You bet!
Some of my forms also have a CAPTCHA. I think it's got to be case-by-case. Do you have something desirable to bad guys (like the signup for a new Yahoo account, or a high-ranking blog about pharmaceuticals)? Do you have tools in place to deal with spam submissions effectively when they do occur? Will a bunch of bots signing up for accounts degrade service for legitimate visitors?
For example, the Contact our Sales team form definitely does not have a CAPTCHA. The sales team will gladly sort though a pile of junk if it means one more inbound lead. But the Post a Comment form would be an absolute disaster without a strong CAPTCHA. A surprising amount of junk gets through anyway, in fact. (As far as I can tell, it's actual humans in developing countries copy/pasting into comments by hands. Blocking referrers from Google that have the phrase "post a comment below" made a dent)
Think he probably means spammers are searching for the phrase 'post a comment below' on Google looking for forms they can spam. You'll see this search term in the HTTP referrer header.
Edit: obviously you could just avoid using this phrase on your site instead.
If timestamp analysis is effective now, it won't be forever. It would be trivially easy to program an autofiller to leave pseudo-random pauses between filling individual fields. If this becomes a much more common technique, the spammers will adapt.