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

They see your photos

theyseeyourphotos.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 240 posts

Re: They see your photos

#221

Post by magicalhippo »

magicalhippo wrote: post #189
IshKebab wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Terrible search without AI is a bit of a stretch. How so? I was looking for a photo of a grave I took some years ago. In Google photos I just searched for "grave" and if found 2 photos, including the one I wanted. Without AI I would have to search all my photos. Maybe I could narrow it down by date and location but it would take a lot longer.

I've been playing with LLama 3.2 Vision 8B for such a use-case, and found it does a good job at providing image descriptions which could be indexed, along with transcription of any text in the image, such as the name on the grave in this case. So should be possible to have a similar capability locally now.

> LLama 3.2 Vision 8B

Brainfart, that should of course be LLama 3.2 Vision 11B. Keep mixing up the model sizes.

Re: They see your photos

#222

Post by MichaelZuo »

ignoramous wrote: post #152
MichaelZuo wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So then how can it be a paid service?

You can self-host Ente. The paid plans are if you choose to backup your photos with them, which is replicated across 3 different providers.

How can the paid plans meet the standard described in the parent comment?

Re: They see your photos

#223

Post by rsync »

0points wrote: post #187
rsync wrote: post #148

magick convert IMG_1111.HEIC -strip -quality 87 -shave 10x10 -resize 91% -attenuate 1.1 +noise Uniform out.jpg This will strip ALL exif metadata, change the quality, shave 10 pixels off each edge just because , resize to xx%, attenuate, and adds noise of type "Uniform". Some additional notes: - attenuate needs to come before the +noise switch in the command line - the worse the jpeg quality figure, the harder it is t…

cropping or recompressing the image helps with nothing. see tineye reverse image search, it matches such variations with ease https://tineye.com/

You and several of your siblings here are missing the point - this is not about resisting or obfuscating image content or subject or fooling an AI classifier, etc.

This imagemagick command is an attempt to remove digital forensic clues that would tie, for instance, an image posted by one pseudonym to an image posted by another pseudonym.

At what confidence level can a raw HEIC from my iphone be tied to the jpeg that results from this cropping, resizing, noise and attenuation ?

At what confidence level can one such transformed jpeg be tied to another such transformed jpeg ? (assuming that you scramble the values for (quality/shave/resize/attenuate) ...)

This is tangential to the OP and the discussion - forgive me - but I think it's an interesting tangent.

Re: They see your photos

#224

Post by xg15 »

It seems to have been prompted to seek out interesting, easily overlooked ("subtle!") details, but actually still misses them even if some are present.

I tried this picture [1] of a model nativity scene, which caused it to go on and on about the dryness of the moss and the indications of wear on the (fake) stable while completely overlooking that the scene had no Jesus.

[1] https://imgur.com/a/x7D1GC7

Re: They see your photos

#226

Post by rcdwealth »

FollowingTheDao wrote: post #171
makeitdouble wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the clarification. My family library is around 1Tb, the weakest device is an iPhone SE, and the most used access is through a web browser. Does on-device machine learning (provided you're syncing inter-device) work in that scenario ?

If I can interrupt.. Wow, 1TB of photos? This is just astonishing to me. What is the use of so many images? As an ex semi-pro photographer, one of the things I realized is that what makes photographs special to people, even family photographs, is the rarity of them. So I just cannot understand taking and holding on to this many images. I would find just managing the images would take away time and money from my famil…

[dead]

Re: They see your photos

#227

Post by ignoramous »

MichaelZuo wrote: post #222
ignoramous wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can self-host Ente. The paid plans are if you choose to backup your photos with them, which is replicated across 3 different providers.

How can the paid plans meet the standard described in the parent comment?

I don't understand. Why do you think it can't?

https://ente.io/architecture

Re: They see your photos

#228

Post by Ancapistani »

autoexec wrote: post #59
gnopgnip wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which ones do those things?

It should be your default assumption that any and all data you hand over to a company will be collected, used by that company in any manner that they feel will be beneficial to them, sold/leaked to others, and ultimately used against you. At a glace, it appears that the privacy policies of walmart, CVS, and walgreens allow for it. I imagine that's where most people these days take their photos for development and/or…

I worked in a Walgreens photo lab circa 2004. At the time the mini lab kept a scanned copy of all images for at least 90 days. I think it was set to use rolling storage, so the time frame wasn’t definite.

On another note, the photo techs will be looking at your photos - at least, the good ones will, so they can adjust for color balance and exposure. The really bad ones will too, so they can keep a copy of any “interesting” photos.

When I worked there, I called the police about once a month, for exactly the reason you might expect.

Re: They see your photos

#229

Post by shever73 »

b800h wrote: post #208
shever73 wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The economic status thing is interesting. I can’t help but wonder if there’s bias there. I uploaded a picture of me and a friend. I am Caucasian, he is of African descent. It said that my attire indicated I was of a higher socio-economic status than him. I was wearing a black t-shirt with a worn print. He was wearing a shirt and sports jacket.

Did it get it right? Giving it the benefit of the doubt, it's possible that the particular shirt / jacket combo is cheap? Just reaching here, instead of plumping for the obvious.

I’d say we are about the same. He looked like he’d come out of a business meeting. I had even joked with him about being overdressed for walking around Parc Guell.

Re: They see your photos

#230

Post by idjdjfrn »

The description generated is completely useless fluff.

Nearly as useless as the automatically generated image titles generated by word and PowerPoint which make the title/alt feature less useful since most modern documents have those autogenerated titles which add no value at all so people skip even reading the descriptions

Post reply on HN