Facebook are trying to put out the fire with gasoline.
I'll get my coat....
Facebook wants to look at my nuts. Aided and abetted by the Australian Government, the $407bn fake news disseminator is fascinated by my inseminator. By having a right old gander at my toilet duck, it hopes to stop other people from Googling my googlies. It's no game. Australia's eSafety Office has confirmed that it will …
I was a bit stunned at reading that you have to send your photo to FB for it to be hashed by them, and then they look for that hash in photo uploads to block it.
Wouldn't it be better to hash it client side and just send them the hash of photos you don't want other folks uploading? I dunno, perhaps invent some new and exciting way of creating the hash at image creation time as part of the camera software
No doubt some naughty peeps would then hash various news photos to prevent their dissemination, but perhaps some mechanisms could be used to minimise this.
There's a Grauniad article which states:
In the Australian pilot, users must first complete an online form on the e-safety commissioner’s website outlining their concerns. They will then be asked to send the pictures they are concerned about to themselves on Messenger while the e-safety commissioner’s office notifies Facebook of their submission. Once Facebook gets that notification, a community operations analyst will access the image and hash it to prevent future instances from being uploaded or shared.
Facebook will store these images for a short period of time before deleting them to ensure it is enforcing the policy correctly, the company said.
which seems to imply a human will be looking at each of these images..... Yeah, that's a good idea
Can your pecker do a marathon?
No, but it does snickers...
And, as the advert says, "Get some nuts!"
Although I've now created a very disturbing mental image for myself involving Mr T. I'd go and have a cuppa to recover, but that involves teabagging, which just isn't helping.
"professor Alan Woodward of the University of Surrey, a Security Expert"
I swear the man has been quoted in the Beeb pretty much every time there is ANYTHING remotely "hackery/security" and was even on El Reg the other day.
"Oi Boss, whatssat geek's name? the one we talk to about the latest company to get hacked? Yeah, the one on retainer".
You can bet your bottom dollar that the Prof lists all his media appearances in his performance assessments and gets lots of approval by his university, which gets mentioned every time he pops up. Expensive to buy such exposure and his Principal and Dean will be most impressed.
I remember in one job dutifully filling in some online form for the university listing my competences but of course never got tapped. Just wait until there is some mass snafu in muscle anatomy and my day will come. Until then I lurk in my mad scientist lair communing my my fellow illuminati and plotting the singularity, with muscles.
This is putting a lot of people under pressure, but I for one will have to express my sorrow and rebel rebel against this. It's pretty clear that Facebook are absolute beginners here; not only that but this is not America and I'm afraid of Americans - they're too quick to send the bombers across the universe to feel safe, even if that makes everyone scream like a baby. Young Americans don't know what's really happening while their boys keep swinging with teenage wildlife.
Anyway, I'm well into my golden years now, so if all the young dudes want to get real, they should remember that we're here today and gone tomorrow. So listen to the DJ and let's dance with the China girl. After a miracle goodnight, the next day will see me start a new career in a new town. It's ain't easy, but I'll just stay a queen bitch.
[I]Judging by the inconsistent performance of Apple's iPhone X Face Recognition, I wonder if the industry is quite ready to roll out what the French might call Fesse Recognition.[/I]
Apparently the FBI have been able to do this since the 50's, at least according to Grease.
Does anyone know why < doesn't work?
This just could be an upside to this, it is possibly the one time that false positives were in everyone's favour.
If it killed off a few hundred, thousand, million (delete to taste) stupid pouting faces along with some jackass nude images all could be well with the world.
I cannot help but think that the more restricted the image coverage, the less likely it is to get a good recognition match, so it could be a useless effort.
If anything the name of the owner would be more relevant as a search term, as in 'here's a picture of vbhgfbut's bits' but that might cramp Zuckbook's monetising efforts.
"[...] the photos will be recognised and blocked automatically, and the perpetrating teenage wildlife instantly get a blackstar."
...and a permanent police record for the subject of the picture. A teenage selfie can attract those in the UK. No doubt Facebook will be obliged to report to the police any hashing submission that appears under 18.
It wasn't taking the image which was and is criminalised it is transmission of it. If you are under 18 then by transmitting an image of your naked self you are transmitting kiddy porn. That is how the thing works.
Though various things have to happen for plod to find out about it and decide to prosecute. If memory serves in that case the recipient fellow showed it around the class.
No matter how much you might fancy someone or like them you need to be very, very sure of their reliability and honesty before you entrust them with personal secrets.
Though it took me some time to convince my wife that I didn't have a secret Swiss bank account. She couldn't believe how poor I was.
I may as well pop my naughty photos onto an encrypted USB stick, chuck it onto the back seat of a taxi and watch the Google analytics go crazy in the knowledge that I cut out the man in the middle and did so on my own terms.
... that this is the acceptable format for leaking highly sensitive government data, such as ministerial visits to Israel, comments by ministers on detained Reuters journalists?
First, I'm a bloke. This makes me 99.9%* more likely to be an offender than a victim. That's just the way it is. Dirty boys. Little wonder.
Also not a politiican (plus the ocassional celebrity) - there's been a few caught out having dispatched images of their members (from the back benches).
* 99.9% of...
Doing the Revenge Porn thing
Having a nudie of an X-partner in your possession.
Or merely having a hard disk or 3 full of young ladies with not much on...?
This seems to be a guaranteed disaster zone, what with new iPhones having terrible trouble recognising their owners,
To confirm things, MS have just rolled out a new version of their photo viewer on Win10. It, or possibly their free cloud offering, attempts to classify photo content. It offered me "fruit".
Well, I didn't remember taking pics of greengrocers' displays, so I had a look. There were three pictures there; all had been uploaded to OneDrive.
First up was a pic of the interior of a pagoda in the Forbidden City in Beijing. Well, there were a few apples and oranges along with the huge floral display, but you could hardly describe it as a picture of FRUIT.
Next was a picture of the Terracotta Army in Xian. Nothing edible to be seen anywhere.
The third was a photo of a gravestone.