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

91–100 of 110 posts

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

#91

Post by lotsofcows »

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…

People seem not to realise that children take only what they can understand. If you show a 6 year old violent porn, they won't be traumatised by the porn but by the violence. If you show a 6 year old "normal" porn they'll ask lots of questions that you'll find more or less awkward depending on how puritan you are.

The conversation with the 6 year old is easy. It's the conversation with the 13 year old that's the problem. Liberals have "the talk" early. Right-wingers have "the talk" late. Very few people have talk regularly as the child grows up.

I'm not sure what your last sentence has to do with the argument.

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

#92

Post by Zimahl »

VLM wrote: post #84
bad_user wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 thi…

I'm actually annoyed that you got modded down. Your post brings up an excellent point although I don't think it's intended.

These days, it comes down to exposure and access. Back when I was a teen (early 90's) we didn't have the internet as it is. Sure there were BBSs but that was about as convenient as trying to get a dirty magazine. While I may had idle curiosity when I was pre-teen, I had zero access to it (my father didn't have any magazines, etc) and therefore it would've taken way too much effort to see it, so it was easily dismissed. In context, it was equally difficult to even see an R rated movie.

These days, my 8 or 10 year old self could be exposed to literally anything within a couple seconds. It's free and prevalent, and can show up in unexpected places. I don't have kids (will soon) but I don't look forward to dealing with those situations.

As for Janet Jackson, I agree that was overblown. If anyone needed therapy for that it was because their parents were overbearing. However, we aren't talking about a bare breast here, we are talking about simulated rape, bestiality, and some other things that just aren't my thing. But, hey, if they are someone's thing that's fine - let's just try to keep that stuff out of the hands of the kids until they are old enough to reason for themselves about what's really going on.

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

#93

Post by Houshalter »

Everyone is focusing on the machine vision problem but the OP had a good idea:

>There are already a few image based search engines as well as face recognition stuff available so I am assuming it wouldn't be rocket science and it could be done.

Just do a reverse image search for the image, see if it comes up on any porn sites or is associated with porn words.

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

#94

Post by Zimahl »

betterunix wrote: post #20

How about a picture of a woman's breasts? What about an erect penis? Sounds like porn, but you might also see these things in the context of health-related pictures or some other educational material. The classic problem of trying to filter pornography is trying to separate it from information about human bodies. I suspect that doing this with images will be even harder than doing it with text.

Definitely true. Facebook had a dust-up when a woman posted a topless photo of herself after she had had a double mastectomy.

That said, not all sites are like Facebook and we aren't talking about filtering all the images on the internet, just ones on specific sites. One example I can think of is that a forum for a sports team might not want NSFW pictures posted as it would be irrelevant.

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

#95

Post by mhurron »

mhurron wrote: post #62
selmnoo wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At the cost of your mental health, sure. I recall reading an article about the human workers who had this job at Google... they had crap benefits, crap pay, and no mental healthcare. As a result a lot of the people in the field had depression and other mental issues.

Isn't Obamacare supposed to cover mental health care? Seems like a solved problem.

Holy hell people, touchy aren't we.

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

#96

Post by tekacs »

mixmax wrote: post #4

detecting all porn seems to be an almost impossible problem. Many kinds of advanced porn (BDSM, etc.) don't have much skin - often the actors are in latex, tied up, or whatever. It's obviously porn when you see it, but detecting it seems incredibly hard. Detecting smurf-porn(1) (yes that's a thing...) is even harder since all the actors are blue. http://pinporngifs.blogspot.dk/2012/09/smurfs-porn.html?zx=7... - obvio…

Couldn't help but read your second line as talking about the smurf-porn(1) man page. :/

man 1 smurf-porn ?!?!

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

#97

Post by denzil_correa »

I am aware of some nice scholarly work in this space. You may find Shih et al. approach of particular interest [0]. Their approach is very straight forward and based on image retrieval. They have also reported an accuracy of 99.54% for Adult image detection in their dataset.

[0] Shih, J. L., Lee, C. H., & Yang, C. S. (2007). An adult image identification system employing image retrieval technique. Pattern Recognition Letters, 28(16), 2367-2374. Chicago

http://sjl.csie.chu.edu.tw/sjl/albums/userpics/10001/An_adul...

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

#98

Post by [deleted] »

t2d2 wrote: post #60
cobrausn wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't remember where I read this, but someone once recommended having a bot that posts the image to 4chan b feed and monitor the views and replies. Since porn images on b usually had somewhat predictable replies, it would be a good way to augment another technique and prevent false positives. Funny idea, but not really sure how viable.

Using /b/ as an unpaid mechanical Turk alternative sounds intriguing yet profoundly disturbing. Imagine being able to fire off a dozen /b/tards bots at the website or target of your choice.

[deleted]

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

#99

Post by aestra »

VLM wrote: post #86
aestra wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 l…

I should have been more specific. The defense "I sexually harass everyone, so it isn't sexual harassment" is just not in any way valid. Full stop. Period.

I used the first class action sexual harassment lawsuit as an example to illustrate the point of "just because it's company culture/I do it to everyone/he's just like that" doesn't make it not harassment.

The GP was giving false information that if you sexually harass everyone, than it magically becomes not sexual harassment and then it somehow gets thrown out in court, but does not cite the relevant court case. Just because you ass grab everyone that walks by doesn't make ass grabbing not sexual harassment by the law.

That's mostly my point.

As far as a p0rn filter, that's a different story. You can look at it a different way, legally.

I'm just playing devil's advocate here as to why it would be a good idea for someone to try to err on the side of caution in the workplace filter rules.

They may want to avoid the situation where person A is sitting in their cube while person B is watching hardcore gay porn next door specifically to harass person A. Person A might feel that the employee didn't do a good enough job to prevent this type of harassment by blocking access to that content.

If the employer doesn't try to filter out porn or at least create a policy against it, it might look like it is condoning or supporting it whereas their peers filter. (I just made that up, if say 85% of their peers make an attempt to filter) especially if it is well known that managers tolerate risque images/video if not outright porn, or if company culture tolerates it.

A less grey example is if you put a picture of two women who are mostly clothed but kissing and put it in the office breakroom. Everyone sees it, but it creates a sexually charged environment that can be hostile to some. That's a big no-no in HR land.

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

#100

Post by twic »

nailer wrote: post #38

I used pifilter (now WeSEE:Filter , http://corp.wesee.com/products/filter/ ) for a production, realtime, anonymous confession site (imeveryone.com) in 2010. It cost, IIRC, a tenth of a cent per image URL. Rather than being based on skin tone, it was created based on algos to specifically identify labia, anuses, penises, etc. REST API: send a URL, get back a yes/no/maybe. You decided what to do with the maybes. My exp…

"Completely unmaintained public hair". And now i'm wondering if we could disrupt the market with a Public Hair as a Service platform.
Post reply on HN