9 ms·

DoNotSnap – An experiment in detecting DoNotSnap badges in photos

57 points by ghosh 10y ago

skrebbel 10y ago
Does anyone here understand what this is about? The author designed a badge and then made a classifier for it? I must be missing something.
- yoz-y 10y ago
  It looks like an initiative http://innovation.avg.com/blog/ http://innovation.avg.com/blog/ I doubt it will get much traction though as it would take a massive overhaul of all application to be usable. Would be fun if it got into CCTV software though.
  - deanCommie 10y ago
    You'd be surprised how quickly change like this can propagate throughout an industry. As a kid in the soviet union I marveled at barcodes in a book thinking how marvelous it would be if every product had one, but it would take decades to get done.
    - yoz-y 10y ago
      Yes, but in that case there was a clear benefit to the implementor. Faster checkout = more money or at least more free time. In this case what would be an incentive for Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat & co to implement this? There would be also issues to have the badge always visible, reducing its functionality. I think this kind of change would only come if it were mandated by regulators. But in that case it could be more interesting to upload your face to some red-list database and then the sites would have to blur images where it is detected. Next step is replacement eyes and blocking à la Black Mirror.
  - xg15 10y ago
    A few years ago, there were conspiracy theories that Hollywood was to develop that technology to close the analog gap. There was general outrage at the idea, articles about all the possible abuses and how it would restrict fundamental rights and pave the way to widespread censorship. Now the exact same technology is employed in the name of privacy. The times, they are a-changing...
- nsxwolf 10y ago
  It's supposed to be used by social media sites to blur your face out of uploaded photos if they detect you are wearing the badge. It would require sites to voluntarily implement it of course.
  - icebraining 10y ago
    Detecting the badge seems doable; detecting with any accuracy the person wearing it seems very hard.
    - alimbada 10y ago
      Also, badge could be obscured with the person's face still visible. Maybe a sticker on the forehead will work...
    - coldtea 10y ago
      >Detecting the badge seems doable; detecting with any accuracy the person wearing it seems very hard. Huh? We have had facial detection for decades, it's even in corn flake boxes now so to speak...
      - ldjb 10y ago
        Detecting the face isn't the problem. The problem is detecting which face is attached to the body wearing the badge. There may be several people in a photo. Determining which face is associated with each badge is no easy feat.
  - michaelmior 10y ago
    > It would require sites to voluntarily implement it of course. My concern is that some would decide it's fun to detect people wearing the badge and try to spread more photos of them. I can't see that not happening so I'm not sure it will be a net win for privacy.
    - SnacksOnAPlane 10y ago
      My thoughts exactly. Kind of like it's more interesting to see who's using encryption because they're probably the ones who are trying to hide something.
QuantumRoar 10y ago
It really annoys me that I'm probably on more photos by accident than on purpose. Or someone takes a picture, I'm in the background and I just see the flash as if it was right in my face and I must wonder how stupid my face must have looked. This is especially frustrating when you are out with friends and want to have a good time. A few years ago, you could still dress up as a flamingo and get drunk. Everybody would have a good laugh, enjoy themselves, and the stories would have been hilarious. But nowadays, you'd end up on at least dozens of Facebooks and Instagrams and it might end up being the first picture coming up when someone searches your name. I would very much like the option to be unphotographable.
- dingo_bat 10y ago
  > I would very much like the option to be unphotographable. Too bad, I say. Because when you are in a public place, you cannot expect privacy. I understand how you feel and why, but there is simply no way of doing this without curtailing somebody else's (legitimate) freedom.
  - QuantumRoar 10y ago
    I do not expect privacy in a public place. But I do expect that not everything I do is recorded and then associated with my name on the Internet. But this is exactly the direction smartphones have taken us. I don't know if you have the same feeling but I do notice a chilling effect in how I behave when I see that someone has their phone out and its camera is pointed approximately in my direction (although they might be checking messages).
  - the8472 10y ago
    Other countries see that differently. The right to one own's picture exists in various jurisdictions, requiring others to either acquire your consent or obscure faces. Also, you can still have reasonable expectations of privacy in public locations, such as your words not being recorded without your consent.
    - Sevrene 10y ago
paulsutter 10y ago
i hope they're recognizing the logo (which is cool) and not the round yellow badge with text (yuck)
- ansgri 10y ago
  Detecting a round yellow object is harder than you might think: think of all weird illumination and white balance settings the camera may have, the yellow might as well turn green or pink. Detecting the logo is probably easier especially for custom machine learning approaches. And in this particular case the logo has enough distinct geometric features for the stable feature point classifier. Though I'd use Random Ferns [0]-like approach for the detection, it combines the speed of decision trees with robustness of stable feature points. [0] http://cvlabwww.epfl.ch/~lepetit/papers/ozuysal_pami10.pdf http://cvlabwww.epfl.ch/~lepetit/papers/ozuysal_pami10.pdf
Mandatum 10y ago
It's very common in Australia to ask people of Aboriginal descent to if it's okay to take their photograph, it has to do with certain beliefs that taking someones photograph equates to "stealing their soul". I believe there are some Native American tribes who hold similar beliefs. I've since refused all photographs that are forced. Posing for photo's, unless formal (weddings, business), seems silly to me. If you want to take a photo, take a photo of a moment. Not a hastily put together scene.
amelius 10y ago
So basically it's a DRM badge. Just saying :)
- em3rgent0rdr 10y ago
  I think DRM implies a forced restriction. But "Do not snap" is rather a voluntary agreement, similar to "Do not track" in browsers.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
brudgers 10y ago
Reminds me of the "ugly tee shirt" in Gibson's Zero History.

57 points by ghosh 10y ago

Does anyone here understand what this is about? The author designed a badge and then made a classifier for it? I must be missing something.

yoz-y 10y ago
It looks like an initiative http://innovation.avg.com/blog/ http://innovation.avg.com/blog/ I doubt it will get much traction though as it would take a massive overhaul of all application to be usable. Would be fun if it got into CCTV software though.
- deanCommie 10y ago
  You'd be surprised how quickly change like this can propagate throughout an industry. As a kid in the soviet union I marveled at barcodes in a book thinking how marvelous it would be if every product had one, but it would take decades to get done.
  - yoz-y 10y ago
    Yes, but in that case there was a clear benefit to the implementor. Faster checkout = more money or at least more free time. In this case what would be an incentive for Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat & co to implement this? There would be also issues to have the badge always visible, reducing its functionality. I think this kind of change would only come if it were mandated by regulators. But in that case it could be more interesting to upload your face to some red-list database and then the sites would have to blur images where it is detected. Next step is replacement eyes and blocking à la Black Mirror.
- xg15 10y ago
  A few years ago, there were conspiracy theories that Hollywood was to develop that technology to close the analog gap. There was general outrage at the idea, articles about all the possible abuses and how it would restrict fundamental rights and pave the way to widespread censorship. Now the exact same technology is employed in the name of privacy. The times, they are a-changing...
nsxwolf 10y ago
It's supposed to be used by social media sites to blur your face out of uploaded photos if they detect you are wearing the badge. It would require sites to voluntarily implement it of course.
- icebraining 10y ago
  Detecting the badge seems doable; detecting with any accuracy the person wearing it seems very hard.
  - alimbada 10y ago
    Also, badge could be obscured with the person's face still visible. Maybe a sticker on the forehead will work...
  - coldtea 10y ago
    >Detecting the badge seems doable; detecting with any accuracy the person wearing it seems very hard. Huh? We have had facial detection for decades, it's even in corn flake boxes now so to speak...
    - ldjb 10y ago
      Detecting the face isn't the problem. The problem is detecting which face is attached to the body wearing the badge. There may be several people in a photo. Determining which face is associated with each badge is no easy feat.
- michaelmior 10y ago
  > It would require sites to voluntarily implement it of course. My concern is that some would decide it's fun to detect people wearing the badge and try to spread more photos of them. I can't see that not happening so I'm not sure it will be a net win for privacy.
  - SnacksOnAPlane 10y ago
    My thoughts exactly. Kind of like it's more interesting to see who's using encryption because they're probably the ones who are trying to hide something.

QuantumRoar 10y ago

It really annoys me that I'm probably on more photos by accident than on purpose. Or someone takes a picture, I'm in the background and I just see the flash as if it was right in my face and I must wonder how stupid my face must have looked. This is especially frustrating when you are out with friends and want to have a good time. A few years ago, you could still dress up as a flamingo and get drunk. Everybody would have a good laugh, enjoy themselves, and the stories would have been hilarious. But nowadays, you'd end up on at least dozens of Facebooks and Instagrams and it might end up being the first picture coming up when someone searches your name. I would very much like the option to be unphotographable.

dingo_bat 10y ago
> I would very much like the option to be unphotographable. Too bad, I say. Because when you are in a public place, you cannot expect privacy. I understand how you feel and why, but there is simply no way of doing this without curtailing somebody else's (legitimate) freedom.
- QuantumRoar 10y ago
  I do not expect privacy in a public place. But I do expect that not everything I do is recorded and then associated with my name on the Internet. But this is exactly the direction smartphones have taken us. I don't know if you have the same feeling but I do notice a chilling effect in how I behave when I see that someone has their phone out and its camera is pointed approximately in my direction (although they might be checking messages).
- the8472 10y ago
  Other countries see that differently. The right to one own's picture exists in various jurisdictions, requiring others to either acquire your consent or obscure faces. Also, you can still have reasonable expectations of privacy in public locations, such as your words not being recorded without your consent.
  - Sevrene 10y ago

paulsutter 10y ago

i hope they're recognizing the logo (which is cool) and not the round yellow badge with text (yuck)

ansgri 10y ago
Detecting a round yellow object is harder than you might think: think of all weird illumination and white balance settings the camera may have, the yellow might as well turn green or pink. Detecting the logo is probably easier especially for custom machine learning approaches. And in this particular case the logo has enough distinct geometric features for the stable feature point classifier. Though I'd use Random Ferns [0]-like approach for the detection, it combines the speed of decision trees with robustness of stable feature points. [0] http://cvlabwww.epfl.ch/~lepetit/papers/ozuysal_pami10.pdf http://cvlabwww.epfl.ch/~lepetit/papers/ozuysal_pami10.pdf

Mandatum 10y ago

It's very common in Australia to ask people of Aboriginal descent to if it's okay to take their photograph, it has to do with certain beliefs that taking someones photograph equates to "stealing their soul". I believe there are some Native American tribes who hold similar beliefs. I've since refused all photographs that are forced. Posing for photo's, unless formal (weddings, business), seems silly to me. If you want to take a photo, take a photo of a moment. Not a hastily put together scene.

amelius 10y ago

So basically it's a DRM badge. Just saying :)

em3rgent0rdr 10y ago
I think DRM implies a forced restriction. But "Do not snap" is rather a voluntary agreement, similar to "Do not track" in browsers.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

brudgers 10y ago

Reminds me of the "ugly tee shirt" in Gibson's Zero History.