I am still amazed at how it is possible to match people in the way this app purports to do. Does anyone know of more accessible (to english speakers) code that can do roughly the same?
Aren't FB and G+ pretty good at labeling people in uploaded pictures? Sure, they're working with a smaller universe and occasionally they need help from the user, but it seems fairly similar to this.
I'm not sure how leading edge the openbr stuff is, AFAICT (i'm not a domain expert or even novice), it's pretty primitive. If you were starting from scratch today, i'd say the openface project (https://cmusatyalab.github.io/openface/) is a better starting point.
Having a DNN that maps images of faces into a point on a hypersphere seems eminently practical. I'm a bit surprised that it works, but having something like that is awesome.
That post is great! thanks for the link, i hadn't stumbled across it yet.
From what I can tell from that link though, it is exactly as I suspected, and openface 0.2 significantly outperforms openbr for the LFW test set. (whereas openfaces 0.1 was largely equivalent). Moreover, I think that there is clearly room for drastic improvement with the openface architecture, either by tweaking the layout of the NN's, or simply throwing more data at it. It is not clear to me how openbr could be improved.
I have this theory that the more beautiful people are, the more likely they are to have a look-alike. So given that these actresses are beautiful, this algorithm will probably generate a lot of false-positives.
The theory is actually quite intuitive, and you can apply it, for example, to flowers. The chances of finding two flowers that look the same are much higher if the flowers are beautiful than if they are not.
”Dvach” (2chan) launched a campaign to deanonymize actresses who appear in pornography. After identifying these women with FindFace, Dvach users shared archived copies of their Vkontakte pages and spammed the women’s families and friends with messages informing them about the discovery. (...) The Internet users behind the doxing campaign say their motivation is moral outrage, claiming that women in the sex industry are “corrupt and deceptive.”
Personally, I find these persons behind the doxing campaign much more corrupt and deceptive.
Seriously, that group is driven by hatred and misunderstanding. They are effectively trolls, poisoning the well for those with legitimate privacy concerns.
Absolutely, but this incident is the perfect example of how new technology will always be used by assholes to do asshole things, along with whatever good uses it was designed for. We should always ask "what would 4chan do with this capability?" when inventing new things.
As seen on HN again today [0], everything that law enforcement touches, turns to shit. They will take a perfect "gait recognition" system and within a month they'll decide it's too conservative and start dialing back the match parameters until they get a list of twenty suspects every time they use the system. Then whomever among that unfortunate list is least able to prove an alibi (i.e. the poorest person) will go directly to prison.
Facial recognition has all sorts of problems, but I think it's funny that the first problem we have with it is related to sex. Like, we have all this great technology, but at the end of the day, we're still a bunch of hairless monkeys (or ugly-bags-of-water, if you're into obscure references).
It is funny how many technologies are introduced the mass market by relating to sex. As smart as we might be, survival and reproduction are still core genetic imperatives.
> It is funny how many technologies are introduced the mass market by relating to sex.
This kind of claim is often made (often by smut mongers), but I don't remember (though may have forgotten) ever seeing any examples that really back up the claim. Can you list some?
>>This kind of claim is often made (often by smut mongers), but I don't remember (though may have forgotten) ever seeing any examples that really back up the claim. Can you list some?
Let me try: Not just technologies, even religions have used sex to sell themselves. Take the kind of things that are sold (in terms of unsubstantiated guarantees of carnal pleasures in heaven after death if you follow the code of conduct proscribed by God(s) via his appointed messengers) you will see that a very large part of this promise is some kind of abundant sex (akin to unlimited download/upload).
See for example this sales pitch. [1]
Thanks for your reply. That's an argument about 'sex sells' though. Like car exhibitions or Microsoft Xbox conventions using scantily clad women.
What I meant (and I think the parent of my post was talking about, though I could be wrong) is the old chestnut that the sex/adult industry innovated or popularized all kinds of technologies.
It's not even obscure: the reference has 67 upvotes on UrbanDictionary, and the page for the referenced episode has existed for 13 years and 363 edits on Memory Alpha, and for 11 years and 371 edits on Wikipedia.
I don't see any evidence that those people are a sufficiently random sample of users vs. Trek nerds who explicitly search for the obscure reference. I'm sure I could find some obscure mathematical reference that 7000 math nerds discuss but is completely unknown by the remaining 99.9999% of the population.
It would funnier if your family and friends were given messages about your intimate activities, jbob
Edit: I can't see the main being that this "is about sex" but rather that this is about privacy and privacy is things people do that for a variety of reasons they don't want some people to know about. Certain sexual behaviors are included here but it seems far from funny or far from "bringing things down to earth", given that what happening is a variety of women suffering in a socially repressive nation.
28 comments
[ 2.7 ms ] story [ 77.2 ms ] threadI am still amazed at how it is possible to match people in the way this app purports to do. Does anyone know of more accessible (to english speakers) code that can do roughly the same?
- Not open source, but it has a demo of face searching (http://www.faceplusplus.com/demo-search/), and an api.
Having a DNN that maps images of faces into a point on a hypersphere seems eminently practical. I'm a bit surprised that it works, but having something like that is awesome.
I am though, in the same boat as you in this domain...not even a novice.
From what I can tell from that link though, it is exactly as I suspected, and openface 0.2 significantly outperforms openbr for the LFW test set. (whereas openfaces 0.1 was largely equivalent). Moreover, I think that there is clearly room for drastic improvement with the openface architecture, either by tweaking the layout of the NN's, or simply throwing more data at it. It is not clear to me how openbr could be improved.
Personally, I find these persons behind the doxing campaign much more corrupt and deceptive.
> "“In theory,” Tsvetkov told RuNet Echo, "this service could be used by a serial killer or a collector trying to hunt down a debtor.”
If anything, this technology will make serial killers easier to catch, right?
I wonder how long until you can be arrested for having a mask on in public.
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11578240
This kind of claim is often made (often by smut mongers), but I don't remember (though may have forgotten) ever seeing any examples that really back up the claim. Can you list some?
Let me try: Not just technologies, even religions have used sex to sell themselves. Take the kind of things that are sold (in terms of unsubstantiated guarantees of carnal pleasures in heaven after death if you follow the code of conduct proscribed by God(s) via his appointed messengers) you will see that a very large part of this promise is some kind of abundant sex (akin to unlimited download/upload). See for example this sales pitch. [1]
[1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HdzusekB8cg
What I meant (and I think the parent of my post was talking about, though I could be wrong) is the old chestnut that the sex/adult industry innovated or popularized all kinds of technologies.
There's a "liquid remix" video of the quote on YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tw_5OfFycU
There's a white-people "jazz" song named after it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cEORdH7RzYw
Josh Woodward has done another rock/pop song probably referencing it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYptvK41Bi4&list=PLDZvNEf3nY...
http://www.terrybisson.com/page6/page6.html
Edit: I can't see the main being that this "is about sex" but rather that this is about privacy and privacy is things people do that for a variety of reasons they don't want some people to know about. Certain sexual behaviors are included here but it seems far from funny or far from "bringing things down to earth", given that what happening is a variety of women suffering in a socially repressive nation.