Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What is the best way to programatically detect porn images? (2009)

stackoverflow.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 110 posts

Re: What is the best way to programatically detect porn images? (2009)

#81

Post by aestra »

Daniel_Newby wrote: post #27
Shivetya wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Harassment laws/lawyers would find you their wet dream. The rule with pictures in any work environment is to err on the side of extreme caution. More than likely your not going to find out they don't mesh with the team till they quit or are fired. If your lucky its not followed by a lawsuit. See, its not their job to not be offended, it is your job to offer a harassment free work environment. Whom you are catering to…

Nope. Harrassment is a legal term of art, not a synonym for disagreeable treatment. Harrassment occurs when a person or group is singled out for distinct treatment, in the U.S. at least. Subjecting everybody to all types of porn is quite lawful. (There is a famous case of a bisexual pervert who indiscriminantly propositioned anything with a pulse. His self-designated victims were bitch slapped out of court.)

What? No.

Sexual harassment is unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical harassment of a sexual nature, no matter how many people are sexually harassed or the gender of the parties involved.

There have been class action sexual harassment lawsuits. Jenson v. Eveleth Taconite Co. was the first which represented fifteen women.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jenson_v._Eveleth_Taconite_Co.

It's a fuzzy ground with say prominent displays of pornographic material in say an office environment. One might argue that it can make the workplace a hostile or overtly sexually charged environment. It is best to err on the side of caution.

Re: What is the best way to programatically detect porn images? (2009)

#82

Post by ElliotH »

racbart wrote: post #24

Wouldn't testing for skin colors produce far too many false positives to be useful? All these beach photos, fashion lingerie photos, even close portraits. And how about half of music stars these days who seem to try to never get caught more clothed than half naked? Nudity != porn and certainly half-nudity != porn. I'd rather go for pattern recognition. There's lot of image recognition software these days that can dis…

When I was in a boarding college we had wardrobe doors that were the perfect colour to set off the skin-tone filters.

Re: What is the best way to programatically detect porn images? (2009)

#83

Post by unoti »

If you're interested in Machine Learning, the outstanding Coursera course on machine learning just started a couple of days ago. It covers a variety of machine learning topics, including image recognition. The first assignment isn't due for a couple of weeks, so it's a perfect time to jump in and take the machine learning course!

https://www.coursera.org/course/ml

Re: What is the best way to programatically detect porn images? (2009)

#84

Post by VLM »

bad_user wrote: post #72
icebraining wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

children do get the wrong ideas about what they see and sometimes it happens with adults too, with porn being the main reason why men think they need big penises to satisfy women Is it porn that gives them the wrong idea, or is it because porn is the only concept of sex that they get exposed to? But I would find useful a system that alerts me when my child gets exposed to porn, such that I can take appropriate measur…

> Is it porn that gives them the wrong idea, or is it because porn is the only concept of sex that they get exposed to? My wife works at a kindergarten and she has first hand experience with 4-year olds being exposed to porn and the effects really aren't nice. What do you propose actually? Live demos or experiments under adult supervision? > Why wouldn't you have fatherly talks about sex regardless of exposure to por…

"My wife works at a kindergarten and she has first hand experience with 4-year olds being exposed to porn and the effects really aren't nice."

I think this is made up, or at most the kids are reacting to the teacher freaking out or trying to tease the teacher knowing its a great way to freak her out.

It is comical to think back at what I thought of sex-ploitive-ish TV when I was a kid, pre-puberty. Now yes I know this wasn't "XXX chicks with happy horses" or whatever, merely broadcast TV, but I don't think that would change the reaction very much.

The women on Charlies Angels? Eh whatever, the A-Team was a better action show although even for a kid, a little formulaic.

The actresses on Laverne and Shirley don't wear bras? Who cares they look like goofballs wearing 50s clothes this is 1980 lets watch battlestar galactica (the original).

The dukes of hazard was all about the car chases, I didn't even notice Daisy's attire (or lack thereof) until my hormones kicked in and suddenly she was very interesting indeed, like from zero interest to 1000+ in what seemed like weeks. When I was young I thought it was a stupid show, like a lame version of Knight Rider which I much preferred.

So the happy couple is reunited and their relationship rekindled on the love boat. Well good for them but I have no interest in watching them smooch and grope each other for thirty seconds on camera. Heck I'd switch to Mr Belvedere if it was on.

Baywatch, seriously, that is the dumbest show ever if you're under 13 or so. Why is the intro this woman running along the beach in slow motion, if she's rescuing people she should be swiming into the ocean not running along it, even a dumb kid knows that.

Once the hormones kick in all a filter does is get in the way of whats suddenly tremendously interesting.

I could see it being awkward for a 7th grade teacher where suddenly some of the boys instantly find Miley Cyrus (or whoever) completely fascinating and the rest are all "eh, girl music, who cares". But at grade-K I'm thinking the reaction is going to be pretty minor most likely "eww gross" but mostly "so what".

I would worry more about gore and gore-shock sites, which is getting pretty far off topic.

So I'm a geezer, so what. So we'll try something more contemporary. How many kids actually required therapy after the famous janet jackson wardrobe malfunction during the superbowl. If they needed therapy it was probably for the agonizing awkward experience of watching what 60 year old bald white guys in NYC think suburban teen youth of america think urban rap stars think is cool and more or less screwing it up hilariously.

Re: What is the best way to programatically detect porn images? (2009)

#85

Post by russellsprouts »

lifeformed wrote: post #78
_mulder_ wrote: post #25

Here's an idea... Develop a bot to trawl NSFW sites and hash each image (combined with the 'skin detecting' algorithms detailed previously). Then compare the user uploaded image hash with those in the NSFW database. This technique relies on the assumption that NSFW images that are spammed onto social media sites will use images that already exist on NSFW sites (or are very similar to). Then it simply becomes a case o…

Is it possible to hash an image so that you can partially match it with subsets of that image (like cropped regions or resizes)? Or a slight modification of that image (colors shifted, image flipped, etc).

I believe so. Tineye uses something similar, because it detects those matches.

Re: What is the best way to programatically detect porn images? (2009)

#86

Post by VLM »

aestra wrote: post #81
Daniel_Newby wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope. Harrassment is a legal term of art, not a synonym for disagreeable treatment. Harrassment occurs when a person or group is singled out for distinct treatment, in the U.S. at least. Subjecting everybody to all types of porn is quite lawful. (There is a famous case of a bisexual pervert who indiscriminantly propositioned anything with a pulse. His self-designated victims were bitch slapped out of court.)

What? No. Sexual harassment is unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical harassment of a sexual nature, no matter how many people are sexually harassed or the gender of the parties involved. There have been class action sexual harassment lawsuits. Jenson v. Eveleth Taconite Co. was the first which represented fifteen women. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jenson_v._Eveleth_Tacon…

Good lord I've read that case and its about as far from the pr0n filter example as you can possibly get. That place was beyond nuts and so was the trial. They deserved every penny they got because the workplace was out of control crazy, and merely coincidentally happened to involve male/female issues.

That is NOT a case about accidentally clicking on a web page or debating if huffpo headline stories are sometimes a little too racy, that was a case about a madhouse of stalking and intimidation and tire slashing and... I don't think a mere web pr0n image filter would have saved the mine 3.5 million dollars. Actually having capable supervisors and managers, yeah, that might have worked?

Re: What is the best way to programatically detect porn images? (2009)

#87

Post by npatten »

"You can programatically detect skin tones - and porn images tend to have a lot of skin. This will create false positives but if this is a problem you can pass images so detected through actual moderation. This not only greatly reduces the the work for moderators but also gives you lots of free porn. It's win-win."

hilarious!

Re: What is the best way to programatically detect porn images? (2009)

#88

Post by lectrick »

Relevant:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_know_it_when_I_see_it

Basically, it's impossible to completely accurately identify pornography without a human actor in the mix, due to the subjectivity... and especially considering that not all nudity is pornographic.

Re: What is the best way to programatically detect porn images? (2009)

#89

Post by mturmon »

anjc wrote: post #79
ma2rten wrote: post #47

I did this for my bachelor thesis for a company that shall remain unnamed. I am pretty confident that my approach works better than any of the answer posted on stackoverflow. I used the so called Bag of Visual Words approach. At that time the state of the art in image recognition (now it's neural networks). You can read about on Wikipeida. The only main change from the standard approach (SHIFT + k-means + histograms…

SHIFT or SIFT? What's SHIFT?

I think he means SIFT. I'm not aware of SHIFT either, and a look at his PAMI paper shows use of color features as well as various SIFT features.
Post reply on HN