Slashdot Mirror
Google Image Labeler
vandalman writes to tell us that Google is betting on the obsessive compulsive need for many users to see big numbers next to their name with a new beta service called Google Image Labeler. From the description: "You'll be randomly paired with a partner who's online and using the feature. Over a 90-second period, you and your partner will be shown the same set of images and asked to provide as many labels as possible to describe each image you see. When your label matches your partner's label, you'll earn some points and move on to the next image until time runs out. After time expires, you can explore the images you've seen and the websites where those images were found. And we'll show you the points you've earned throughout the session."
It looks like google just created a clone of the ESP Game.
This sig cannot be proven true.
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~biglou/research.html has the papers and http://www.peekaboom.org/ is the game implementation.
Doesn't Google already use Content Based Image Retrieval anyways for their image search? If so, why would they need to attach a bunch of metadata to each image?
Technically google didn't rip of the ESP game. From this article http://blog.searchenginewatch.com/blog/060901-0943 09 It seems Google officially licensed the game.
Here is a google video of Luis doing a google tech talk about human computation which I am wishing was linked from the google Image labeler home page itself.
liqbase
Remember when amazon.com paid $.03 to identify pictures through their mechanical turk program? Now Google wants us to do it for free.
I didn't get one tag in common with my partner!
Even without deliberate abuse, which will be rampant, the odds of two people labeling the same image in the same way are virtually nil.
Human beings are just barely able to communicate with each other when we are face-to-face. Language functions primarily as a carrier wave for innonation and expression in most (non-geek) social interactions, so the precise meaning of words hardly matters. Because of this we rarely notice that meaning is extremely elastic.
Meaning is a verb--it is something people do, not a property of the objects we do it to. Expecting two people to mean the same thing with regard to the same image is equivalent to expecting them to dance the same steps in time with each other, even though they are in separate cities and just hearing the same music over the Web.
Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
How was Google Image Labeler developed?
Google Image Labeler is based in part on technology licensed from and developed at Carnegie Mellon University.
http://images.google.com/imagelabeler/help.html
yep, they should use DomTT (anonymous plug)
A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
Google licensed the game. Luis von Ahn even gave a lecture at Google some time ago (which you can watch here)
5) At then end you can mouse over the images, and it shows you "what the other idiot suggested"
The FireFox image zoom extension (among others) imitate the behavior the GP described.
Centralization breaks the internet.
I don't know, Gmail's pretty good.
Nobody else has this sig.
Danny Sullivan reported that Luis von Ahn granted use of his ESP Game through licensing. http://blog.searchenginewatch.com/blog/060901-0943 09
- what is the definition of simultanagnosia?! I've been meaning to look it up!
I'm pretty sure I've seen some university project identical to this some time (1 year ?) ago.
Google Image Labeler is based in part on technology licensed from and developed at Carnegie Mellon University.
Stop Computers/Cars Analogies on S
Huh? I just played the game for five minutes and my 'partner' and I repeatedly labelled images the same way. Telephone, tree, meeting, magazine... Lots of common tags.
And Firefox has a plugin to do that. And IE7 can scale a whole web page.
Well, that's why you have an 'excluded' category of words. I guess after the first match, the images are fed again into the system, with that word being denied, forcing the players to find another match. Good way to avoid everyone putting 'image' as a tag.
Non-Linux Penguins ?
Do you care about the security of your wireless mouse?
"don't quite understand that communism ("people should own the means of production they use, and if a particular means needs more than one people to operate, then those people should own it communally") is not exclusive to free market ("everyone is free to produce what they want and trade with whoever they will")."
Not according to Marx in his "Communist Manifesto", who said: "the theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property."
Communal worker ownership of the means of production is only *part* of communism, and possibly the most benign part. Unfortunately the abolition of private property means that the *fruits* of production are also communally owned -- and thus in a sense not owned by anyone at all except those handful of individuals that claim to represent the whole of the community.
After the game is finished, the system displays a scoreboard, followed by the images you just tagged. Just roll over the image and you'll see your partner's guesses (it's the title attribute of the img tag).
:)
They should make it more clear, but I guess that's what the 'beta' stands for.
Instant Karma's gonna get you, Gonna knock you right on the head (John Lennon, 1970)
No evil corporate subterfuge here. Read the help:
http://images.google.com/imagelabeler/help.html
How was Google Image Labeler developed?
Google Image Labeler is based in part on technology licensed from and developed at Carnegie Mellon University.
Slashdot quality declines as the number of hot grits posts decreases. - Provolt's Law, Apr-09-2005
I'm not upset that you're criticizing capitalism, but that you're doing it out of ignorance:
..." line?), whether or not their efforts produced any benefit. Whether or not a given worker is completely useless.
It is the basic idea behind the Communist Manifesto: workers should reap the benefits of their own efforts,
No, communists believe that people should be paid "according to need" (remember that "from each according to ability
this requires that everyone owns the means of production he uses, and since a factory can't be operated by a single person alone, it should be owned communally by all the workers working there who can then share the profits between themselves instead of having a rich capitalist - megacorp in these times - pocket them.
Again, the whole "corporations get all the profits". Well, they also get all the losses. Do you want to wait to get paid until the corporation has paid back all of its expenses? Do you want to refund wages when it sinks without earning a profit? If you think your employer is going to get rich, a neat trick is to "buy shares". In a worker-owned factory, every worker's ENTIRE investments are in the factory. If ANYTHING goes wrong -- over which they have no control -- they lose their job and their savings. Nice deal, huh? This is why people don't own their workplaces. It makes much more sense for them to trade their share in their workplace and buy shares in a broad array of businesses so as to insure themselves against the financial risk.
Contrary to what you have said above, it is possible to have worker-owned factories under capitalism. They're actually heavily tax favored. Of all the enormous unions out there, any one of them could have pooled members funds and performed a hostile takeover (look it up) of any existing corporation. The reason they don't is, a) the financial risk above, and b) they all realize that what would happen is that for a few days they would merrily "pay themselves" a "fair wage" until they realized they could just pay the market rate for other people to do it.
Please, cure your ignorance.
Apology to Ubuntu forum.