Quote:
Originally posted by Backov
I did not say flesh tone analysis - that's a different thing altogether and probably wouldn't be useful to you. It's about determining whether an image is porn, not comparing two images.
High tech and low tech? More like low tech and really low tech. This is something your average TGP scripter could write. Seriously - it's a spider that md5s pics and puts the hash in a db with a little extra data that the army of reviewers inserts telling you whether this particular variation of a pic is CP or not.
Weak.
|
your observations are right on target. It is true that anyone could write such a program as you described, but no one has.
It's true that you could have a volunteer army of validators, that's our plan, but no one is doing it.
as a sponsor, or webmaster, you don't have the time, energy, or interest to take on such a task.
i'll give you the point that we are using low tech, and even lower tech... it's actually in our favor. Low tech solutions have always gone the test of time, whereas high tech ideas have crashed and burned.
We are using old technology (md5) and even older technology (human beings), to solve this problem.
While we do have our own technology that i will not categorize as "high tech" given this discussion, it neverless does the job and doesn't have dust on it.
One thread that hasn't popped up yet, is whether this issue of combating CP is a problem to be solved.
Here we are saying that the sniffy service will take on huge loads of work in validating images, a process that any tgp scripter could do and an army of volunteers could implement, which no one has done, and believing that we have a solution that is proactive and solves the problem that CP does exist on websites.
The other stance in our belief is that sponsors are sensitive to the notion of supporting any CP affiliate website with their dollars, from a legal to ethical perspective.
if a sponsor sees this as an issue, then we are providing a solution. It will be up to the sponsor to sign sniffy up for the job. For the affiliate webmaster, it's all about compliance with the sponsor's requirements. If the sponsor doesn't want any CP affiliates, then part of the deal that an affiliate agrees to, is that a third party validation of the website will be done and on a continual monthly basis (in a non-intrusive way), to certify that the afiiliate is in compliance.
if a webmaster has something to hide, it will show up by what sniffy finds, or in their actions to try to thwart sniffy. We are not here to judge the affiliates, we are here to serve the interests of the sponsors.
The sponsors will have the discussions with the affiliate webmaster as to why sniffy has red flagged them.
On a prior post about having a false-positive on an affiliate and turning them in to the sponsor, that situation could not happen unless CP material was on the site.
if an image is in question where it might be 18+, and deemed by the reviewer as potential CP, there are other layers above the reviewer that will further qualify. We are in no way, resting a webmaster's reputation on what 1 person thought was CP images. There will be many checks and balances to ensure that.
-dj