5 ms·

Historians are using facial recognition to identify people in Civil War photos

59 points by prismatic 8y ago

drdeadringer 8y ago
I like this type of application for this technology. A good tightrope rabbit hole is: what if "the unknown soldier" is identified writ large? Personally, I would love to have some folks in Ye Olde Family Photographs identified.
- cf498 8y ago
  The question is, does that justify working on that kind of technology? Dual use is a bit to friendly of a wording here. This is a step into a dystopia we have taken a while back.
- ComputerGuru 8y ago
  For those that aren’t aware, at least in the case of the United States, the soldier buried in The Tomb of the Unknown Soldier’s identity was not initially unknown. They started off with several bodies of appropriate stature whose identity was known (but closely guarded) to those that procured them, then mixed them up and played a game of shells with the coffins to purposely un-know the identity. All that is to say, if somehow “facial recognition” could identify the remains of the Unknown Soldier, the hope is that whosoever discovers that keeps it to themself.
  - twtw 8y ago
    > whose identity was known (but closely guarded) I can't find any resources online to confirm this - everything seems to indicate several unknown soldiers were exhumed and one was selected (from each conflict). Do you have any pointers to references where I could learn more?
  - 5555624 8y ago
    > For those that aren’t aware, at least in the case of the United States, the soldier buried in The Tomb of the Unknown Soldier’s identity was not initially unknown Th soldier initially buried in the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier was from World War I. He has not been identified. Subsequently, unknown soldiers from World War II and Korea were interred and neither has been identified, The unknown soldier from Vietnam was identified. That crypt remains empty as the suspect that all remains from Vietnam will someday be identified,
andrewtbham 8y ago
Is this a repeat? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18587607 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18587607
cetra3 8y ago
We're doing something similar for school archive photos in our product. We use class photos to find student labels, then use that to cross reference other photos around the same time period.
21 8y ago
This work is unethical. Those people never approved for their privacy to be violated in such a flagrant way. Would you approve researchers from 100 years in the future using facial recognition to identify and shame meat-eating bastards from today, such as you or your friends, such that for example your work and legacy to be de-platformed?
- jMyles 8y ago
  Sarcasm? If so, it's very well done. If not: > Would you approve researchers from 100 years in the future using facial recognition to identify and shame meat-eating bastards from today, such as you or your friends, such that for example your work and legacy to be de-platformed? My approval has nothing to do with it. I don't own photons after they bounce off my face. And I don't own anything after I'm dead.
  - cf498 8y ago
    >My approval has nothing to do with it. I don't own photons after they bounce off my face. They should not exist in the first place, except made by people who have my clear consent for that specific picture. And those would know the limitations on publishing them. Mass surveillance is a clear and apparent threat to society. The idea of a completely transparent human without any shred of privacy left is simply abhorrent. Hello 1984 edit: I read "Photos"
    - jMyles 8y ago
      You are trying to tell me that I can't take a picture of anything without the specific consent of every organism off of which every photon that enters my sensor most recently bounced? And you are calling my comment dystopic?! Do I need to walk around with my eyes closed also? Or simply agree not to remember you without your consent?
      - cf498 8y ago
        Photos. Of a sentient human being who dont want to be photographed https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/03/a-part-of-daily-life-south-korea-confronts-its-voyeurism-epidemic-sexual-harassment https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/03/a-part-of-dail... https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/south-korea-spycam-porn-women-protest-voyeurism-invasion-of-privacy-a8477611.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/south-korea-sp... edit: or on non sexual voyeurists https://www.pennlive.com/news/2016/04/napalm_girl_was_haunted_by_the.html https://www.pennlive.com/news/2016/04/napalm_girl_was_haunte... >Phuc said the image haunted her for decades, as she struggled to come to terms with its shadow and legacy, the embarrassment and pain it conjured.
ComputerGuru 8y ago
For all the people talking about consent in this thread... I just want to point out that the Civil War significantly predated the phone camera, modern digital cameras, or even the first film point and shoot cameras. We call it “posing” for a photo because they literally had to pose without moving for at least 15 minutes (and probably more in the mid-1800s).. just like you would have to remain in-place holding a pose for hours while having your portrait painted in the eras past. Interesting fact: it’s also the reason why photos from the 1900s all feature the same grim countenance and subjects look like they’ve lost all interest in life - it’s not possible to hold a friendly face for the duration of time it takes the film to expose.
- ericpauley 8y ago
  There are a couple myths here. Civil War photography achieved shutter speeds on the order of seconds, and camera technology isn't the strongest explanation for the lack of smiles. Source: http://time.com/4568032/smile-serious-old-photos/ http://time.com/4568032/smile-serious-old-photos/
  - stareatgoats 8y ago
    Interesting. Early photograph subjects may have posed as if they were objects of portrait painting. And > Though saints might be depicted with faint smiles, wider smiles were “associated with madness, lewdness, loudness, drunkenness, all sorts of states of being that were not particularly decorous,” says Trumble.

59 points by prismatic 8y ago

I like this type of application for this technology. A good tightrope rabbit hole is: what if "the unknown soldier" is identified writ large? Personally, I would love to have some folks in Ye Olde Family Photographs identified.

cf498 8y ago
The question is, does that justify working on that kind of technology? Dual use is a bit to friendly of a wording here. This is a step into a dystopia we have taken a while back.
ComputerGuru 8y ago
For those that aren’t aware, at least in the case of the United States, the soldier buried in The Tomb of the Unknown Soldier’s identity was not initially unknown. They started off with several bodies of appropriate stature whose identity was known (but closely guarded) to those that procured them, then mixed them up and played a game of shells with the coffins to purposely un-know the identity. All that is to say, if somehow “facial recognition” could identify the remains of the Unknown Soldier, the hope is that whosoever discovers that keeps it to themself.
- twtw 8y ago
  > whose identity was known (but closely guarded) I can't find any resources online to confirm this - everything seems to indicate several unknown soldiers were exhumed and one was selected (from each conflict). Do you have any pointers to references where I could learn more?
- 5555624 8y ago
  > For those that aren’t aware, at least in the case of the United States, the soldier buried in The Tomb of the Unknown Soldier’s identity was not initially unknown Th soldier initially buried in the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier was from World War I. He has not been identified. Subsequently, unknown soldiers from World War II and Korea were interred and neither has been identified, The unknown soldier from Vietnam was identified. That crypt remains empty as the suspect that all remains from Vietnam will someday be identified,

andrewtbham 8y ago

Is this a repeat? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18587607 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18587607

cetra3 8y ago

We're doing something similar for school archive photos in our product. We use class photos to find student labels, then use that to cross reference other photos around the same time period.

21 8y ago

This work is unethical. Those people never approved for their privacy to be violated in such a flagrant way. Would you approve researchers from 100 years in the future using facial recognition to identify and shame meat-eating bastards from today, such as you or your friends, such that for example your work and legacy to be de-platformed?

jMyles 8y ago
Sarcasm? If so, it's very well done. If not: > Would you approve researchers from 100 years in the future using facial recognition to identify and shame meat-eating bastards from today, such as you or your friends, such that for example your work and legacy to be de-platformed? My approval has nothing to do with it. I don't own photons after they bounce off my face. And I don't own anything after I'm dead.
- cf498 8y ago
  >My approval has nothing to do with it. I don't own photons after they bounce off my face. They should not exist in the first place, except made by people who have my clear consent for that specific picture. And those would know the limitations on publishing them. Mass surveillance is a clear and apparent threat to society. The idea of a completely transparent human without any shred of privacy left is simply abhorrent. Hello 1984 edit: I read "Photos"
  - jMyles 8y ago
    You are trying to tell me that I can't take a picture of anything without the specific consent of every organism off of which every photon that enters my sensor most recently bounced? And you are calling my comment dystopic?! Do I need to walk around with my eyes closed also? Or simply agree not to remember you without your consent?
    - cf498 8y ago
      Photos. Of a sentient human being who dont want to be photographed https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/03/a-part-of-daily-life-south-korea-confronts-its-voyeurism-epidemic-sexual-harassment https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/03/a-part-of-dail... https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/south-korea-spycam-porn-women-protest-voyeurism-invasion-of-privacy-a8477611.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/south-korea-sp... edit: or on non sexual voyeurists https://www.pennlive.com/news/2016/04/napalm_girl_was_haunted_by_the.html https://www.pennlive.com/news/2016/04/napalm_girl_was_haunte... >Phuc said the image haunted her for decades, as she struggled to come to terms with its shadow and legacy, the embarrassment and pain it conjured.

ComputerGuru 8y ago

For all the people talking about consent in this thread... I just want to point out that the Civil War significantly predated the phone camera, modern digital cameras, or even the first film point and shoot cameras. We call it “posing” for a photo because they literally had to pose without moving for at least 15 minutes (and probably more in the mid-1800s).. just like you would have to remain in-place holding a pose for hours while having your portrait painted in the eras past. Interesting fact: it’s also the reason why photos from the 1900s all feature the same grim countenance and subjects look like they’ve lost all interest in life - it’s not possible to hold a friendly face for the duration of time it takes the film to expose.

ericpauley 8y ago
There are a couple myths here. Civil War photography achieved shutter speeds on the order of seconds, and camera technology isn't the strongest explanation for the lack of smiles. Source: http://time.com/4568032/smile-serious-old-photos/ http://time.com/4568032/smile-serious-old-photos/
- stareatgoats 8y ago
  Interesting. Early photograph subjects may have posed as if they were objects of portrait painting. And > Though saints might be depicted with faint smiles, wider smiles were “associated with madness, lewdness, loudness, drunkenness, all sorts of states of being that were not particularly decorous,” says Trumble.