Archived Facebook built an internal database of 'revenge porn' pictures to prevent repeat sharing (businessinsider.com)
submitted ago by puggy
Posted by: puggy
Posting time: 3.7 years ago on
Last edit time: never edited.
Archived on: 7/5/2017 10:00:00 AM
Views: 986
SCP: 37
38 upvotes, 1 downvotes (97% upvoted it)
Archived Facebook built an internal database of 'revenge porn' pictures to prevent repeat sharing (businessinsider.com)
submitted ago by puggy
Sort: Top
[–] CrazyInAnInsaneWorld 0 points 11 points 11 points (+11|-0) ago
And by changing just a couple of pixels, you can change up the hash of the picture while still keeping the overall image intact. A computer looks at images, and doesn't see abstract items like you and I do, all it sees is pixels. Switch those pixels up, and as far as the computer is concerned, it's looking at two different images.
I see Oldfag Anon having an absolute field day with this...they could even start out with the images from The Fappening, just to add insult to injury.
[–] DickHertz 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
Using a hash would be very efficient but as you say change one pixel and that blows that. My guess is that they would use some kind of machine learning system to flag similar photos but it's still a pig in a poke.
[–] HeavyBrain ago
Thats when we use very yimilar photos that have nothing to do with the original till this algorithm is flaging most pics and people start to reeee.
[–] FairDinkum 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
how do I swap pixels in a photo?
[–] CrazyInAnInsaneWorld ago
See here.
[–] HeavyBrain 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Yup, thats how I go around the double post wall on /pol/.
Literally opening it up in Paint and adding one dot of the same color and bam.
[–] InDifferent 1 point 1 point 2 points (+2|-1) ago
Haven't read the article yet but I'm sure it's not going to miss flagging a picture because someone changed a few pixels on a photo. I would assume that it would figure out percentage of similarity between pictures by looking at every pixel, comparing it to the original, and return a percentage of how many pixels are the same or close enough. It also wouldn't surprise me in this case if it would weight any flesh colored pixels as more important to avoid people just changing the background of the image.
[–] CrazyInAnInsaneWorld 0 points 5 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago
The problem with that, is how do you determine what makes a "Close enough match" to ban illicit pic-sharers without hitting collateral damage for banning false positives? What are we going to have the percentage set at, 51% Similarity = Permaban? Better get ready for a fuckton of false positives and a LOT of pissed off users going to other platforms. Also, if they change the shade of the colors, that in itself would bypass the values the database had on the picture. Remember, computers don't see abstract concepts. They see colors, pixels, and more technical aspects. They don't go, "Oh, that's a pair of tits," they say "This is a .jpg image, size of 250kb, dimensions 1000 * 900, with a collection of pixels with certain hex values for color assigned to them." That's why they have to rely on community flagging/policing for "Offensive content", because abstract concepts such as "Offensive" don't make any sense to a computer. Even if they made the database self-teaching and self-evolving to keep up with the evolving pics the community flagged, that doesn't safeguard against new mutations/iterations of the same content, and that just opens up one more attack vector against the system, via false-flagging.
My point being, there are ways around automated systems a'plenty. This won't stop people determined to bypass the automated system (Just look at the amount of people bypassing Reddit's shadowban system on a daily basis originating from these parts) and regular users, the same users that provide Facebook with their revenue, will be caught in the crossfire of this informational arms race. Zuck the Cuck is basically shooting up the barn with an AK to kill a rat...while the horses are all stabled.
Facebook forgets what happened to MySpace and disregards the possibility they can easily become MySpace 2.0, as soon as a viable competitor arises. And stunts like this are only going to speed their demise once sites like https://minds.com and http://gab.ai get rolling at full speed. Much like Reddit and Digg, their hubris has gotten the best of them.
[–] pyres 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
If only they could build a database to prevent terrorists from using Facebook to recruit.
[–] hypercat 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
You don't think they don't? Of course they do, the govt. uses it to easily monitor them. If they don't let terrorist use a network system that is easy to track they will use something else that is harder to track.
[–] [deleted] 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago (edited ago)
[–] thrus 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Main problem is that looking at porn while doing a headstand makes it harder to concentrate on what you are doing. operating a mouse, being upside down and using another hand for stuff is hard.
[–] tame ago
Given that that's how they generate expanded training sets for machine vision, it's not going to do much.
[–] IBNSFW 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
That's how I read it.
And that's why it's getting "attention". If it "disproportionately affected men", this would not even be a concern. This is just more feelgood bullshit spin to make facebook look like it's doing a "good thing" while it's saving your dirties in a database... you know, along with all the other information that will "never be sold or 'leaked', we swear". Best part? This system is going to be totally useless.. like all the other "systems" on facebook "designed for privacy/Muh rights".
Facebook's end goal is not to protect people but to sell as much data about them as possible.
[–] HeavyBrain 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Well Zuck cuck cant have competition on collecting private data especially not form stupid fucks like the TSA.
[–] DietCokehead1 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
Seems pretty easy to get around that
[–] NassTee 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
That's the same excuse I use for my sick, dirty porn collection.
[–] zugz1m0reday ago
I wish this would happen for internet meme's and "funny pictures" because "OP is a reposting faggit." (not this OP)
[–] FairDinkum ago
Big Brother groweth!
The company also said it was launching an automated process to prevent the repeat sharing of banned images. Photo-matching software will keep the pictures (*of everyone") from the core Facebook network as well as off its Instagram and Messenger services, it said.
FUCk! CIA heaven