Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Chatroulette Working On Genital Recognition Algorithm

Posted by samzenpus on from the image-recognition-is-a-hairy-problem dept.

Show them while you can, Internet exhibitionists. Chatroulette is working on image-recognition software that will filter out shots of male genitalia. The website's founder, Andrey Ternovskiy, hopes that blocking the offending members will help clean up Chatroulette's reputation. He's even enlisted the help of Napster founder Shawn Fanning. I wonder if someone has told Andrey how well it went for Napster?

70 of 364 comments (clear)

  1. but...but... by Pojut · · Score: 4, Funny

    What if I have a bisected penis, you insensitive clod?!?!? Or maybe just some really flashy jewelry...

    --
    Living With a Nerd
    1. Re:but...but... by Jeng · · Score: 4, Funny

      But what if you look like Peter Griffin?

      --
      Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
    2. Re:but...but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Optical Dick Recognition had to take off at some point

    3. Re:but...but... by DamienRBlack · · Score: 4, Funny

      You know, when it said "Genital Recognition Algorithm" I though they meant something like facial recognition, where it would be able to identify someone for security purposes using their genitals. I guess that would get rid of the "anyone can get a picture of your face" problem.

  2. Suddenly... by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 2, Funny

    90% of ChatRoulette users get dropped.

    1. Re:Suddenly... by TheLink · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually you don't have to block or drop them. If the genital recognition algorithm works, you could just link those users to a video/chatbot that laughs at them. Of course it won't work so well if they drop their pants right in the middle of a session with a real human, but you could still automatically switch quickly to the "chatbot" after that.

      But I thought people that go to chatroulette should be expecting crap like this and worse? I haven't bothered since I don't have a webcam, nor do I want to risk seeing some yucky stuff.

      FWIW, I doubt seeing some genitals would bother me. As long as they're not mangled/bloody or gross in some other way. Maybe they should have something that recognizes Goatse and worse stuff, that'll be more useful (though a lot more challenging :) ).

      --
    2. Re:Suddenly... by John+Hasler · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > ...you could just link those users to a video/chatbot that laughs at them.

      Just link them to each other.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    3. Re:Suddenly... by Altus · · Score: 4, Funny

      Isn't that pretty much how it works now?

      --

      "In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson

    4. Re:Suddenly... by cayenne8 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      "The idea is to keep the females from leaving. They aren't going to visit a chat site if there is nothing but pics of genitalia."

      Err.....girls don't like seeing nekkid men?!?!

      News to me...

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    5. Re:Suddenly... by AvitarX · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Doubtful,

      It's not that there is a huge quantity of wang, it is simply that the secret wankers are nexted very quickly.

      My 20 minute conversation pulls a random aussie out of rotation for over 100 times as long as I pull a secret wanker out of the running (ten seconds tops if the screen loads slowly).

      This leads to the secret wankers being very over-represented. If 1/3 of the shots are wankers, that's about .3% being wankers.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    6. Re:Suddenly... by Gaygirlie · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's probably more to do with the looks of the person: I'd sell my grandma if I could get to look at Jason Statham naked, but seeing a 40+ year old greasy, fat, untidy dirty pig over a poor webcam picture showing off his genitals really isn't something I'd dream of.

      Besides, a healthy view of the world, clever sense of humour and the ability to actually discuss all things maturely is a lot more attractive than a penis of any size or quality.

    7. Re:Suddenly... by clone53421 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Besides, a healthy view of the world, clever sense of humour and the ability to actually discuss all things maturely is a lot more attractive than a penis of any size or quality.

      And an excellent way to get yourself quickly friend-zoned, yeah.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
  3. If they really want to be popular by spleen_blender · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They should make an algorithm that filters IN tits.

    1. Re:If they really want to be popular by bertoelcon · · Score: 3, Funny

      Well if they take out the penises all that will be left is tits, pussy, ass, faces, signs, and fake webcam drivers.

      --
      Anything can be found funny, from a certain point of view.
  4. Priorities by Ltap · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Chatroulette is working on image-recognition software that will filter out shots of male genitalia.

    I guess we know where their priorities lie...

    --
    Yet Another Tech Blog
    (but so much more, including game and movie reviews)
    http://yanteb.peasantoid.org
    1. Re:Priorities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      There's actually a pretty decent amount of it, albeit a small fraction of the amount of male genitalia. Strangely enough though, it has not drawn a proportionate number of complaints.

    2. Re:Priorities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      I think that if they broadened their genital-blocking horizons, their userbase would dry up.

      You mean SHRIVEL up.

  5. Seriously by name_already_taken · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I thought that was what Chatroulette was for.

    --
    Putting moderation advice in your .sig lowers your karma!
    1. Re:Seriously by rwa2 · · Score: 3, Funny

      A friend of mine's description of Chatroulette:

      "How many clicks to dick?"

    2. Re:Seriously by mpeskett · · Score: 2

      I suspect their thinking is that being synonymous with endless hordes of masturbators isn't the best thing for encouraging new people to take part. There's some people willing to put up with the dicks and use the service for whatever it's supposed to be for, but I'll bet there's more people who would be interested if they weren't expecting it to be a continual penis parade...

  6. So... the only problem is the penis? by jfengel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The way I read this, it says, "ChatRoulette is a great idea. The only problem is that there's too much penis. Get rid of that and it'll be fine."

    Uh, no. Trolls will troll. Showing your junk to the camera is the easiest and most obvious way, but even if you cut that out you'll just face the next thing down the pike. You're never going to out-grief the trolls.

    They're going to need something a lot more sophisticated than that. Google's Safe Search uses word context clues. It's far from perfect, but it seems to do a reasonably good job. If ChatRoulette doesn't want to be overrun with trolls, they're going to need to think at least that creatively, which means gathering up a lot more information than "that looks like teh peener".

    1. Re:So... the only problem is the penis? by maxwell+demon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Don't forget that trolls are also humans, and therefore also have a certain intelligence. If they know that their first chat is a troll test, they will not troll until they get to the real chat.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    2. Re:So... the only problem is the penis? by albedoa · · Score: 3, Funny

      That analogy would validate if, when faced with seat belts and airbags, the cause of car crashes evolved.

    3. Re:So... the only problem is the penis? by jfengel · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't have any perfect solutions, but I'd say a radically different way of solving the problem would be to make people pay for it, even a small amount.

      If you catch misbehavior, you boot them without refund. And refuse to accept that credit card account as payment again. It doesn't eliminate the trolls, but it makes it harder. (It also helps pay for the fact that you need staff to review troll reports, and since that job involves looking at trolls all day...)

      There's also a Slashdot-esque solution, separating the anons from the newbies from the people who have earned reputations. Let people set the level at which they choose to browse.

      Added to all this an automatic "I can tell you're trolling" detector might save some grief (people might get trolled and not report it, letting the troll go on), but they're going to need more than that.

    4. Re:So... the only problem is the penis? by Merls+the+Sneaky · · Score: 5, Interesting

      What they need is a rating system, like /. The trolls still troll, but the amount of people exposed to the troll is greatly reduced and it ruins most of their fun. Sure they can continue to use it, but you could redirect them to other random trolls. That way all the trolls get to look at each others cocks, and people who aren't that interested in cock will get to the people they want to interact with faster.

    5. Re:So... the only problem is the penis? by Chih · · Score: 2, Insightful

      See, this is too easy, it will never be implemented. You need to think of something that is a magnitude more difficult than penis recognition software, and I bet they'll latch onto it in a heartbeat.

      --
      For best results, avoid doing stupid things.
    6. Re:So... the only problem is the penis? by stu72 · · Score: 2

      ok so it's not the car crash evolving but it works out the same:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_homeostasis

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_compensation

  7. What? by SnugglesTheBear · · Score: 5, Funny

    I thought the whole point of chatroulette was a gamble between seeing an actual person or just a dude jacking off.

    --
    Would you hug a bear?
  8. Really... by doctor_nation · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't understand why they don't have a simple voting system. If a user does something bad or obscene, vote them down. Then match the poorly rated people with each other. Or just have an obscenity button and if a person triggers it multiple times they get kicked off.

    1. Re:Really... by joggle · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually, it works pretty well for slashdot. Have you looked at other, non-moderated forums such as at newspaper websites? It seems at least half the posts there are trolls.

    2. Re:Really... by welcher · · Score: 2, Informative

      They do have an obscenity button -- three people push it and you are out.

    3. Re:Really... by Cyberllama · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Show Tits or I vote you down.

    4. Re:Really... by discord5 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Then match the poorly rated people with each other. Or just have an obscenity button and if a person triggers it multiple times they get kicked off.

      Foolproof! Nobody is ever going to abuse that system.

  9. But... but... by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 2, Interesting

    What about the people who want to look at boners? Won't somebody please think of the perverts?!

    Though really this is an opportunity waiting to be snatched up. Chatroulette has demonstrated that there is a huge userbase just waiting to wave their willies on camera, so all somebody need do is create software that does something similar, and then make it known that 'this is the new place to flash people on teh intarwebs!' and BOOM instant userbase (= MONAY).

    If I weren't so lazy I'd do it myself.

    --
    I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
    1. Re:But... but... by uncanny · · Score: 2, Insightful

      it's called the rest of the internet

    2. Re:But... but... by maxwell+demon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What about the people who want to look at boners? Won't somebody please think of the perverts?!

      Anyone who wants to see male genitalia is a pervert? What about all those who want to see female genitalia?

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  10. Blatant Sexism by damn_registrars · · Score: 4, Funny

    Chatroulette is working on image-recognition software that will filter out shots of male genitalia.

    So women can show their hoo-ha, but I can't show my ting-ting? Where's the ACLU on this one?

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    1. Re:Blatant Sexism by $RANDOMLUSER · · Score: 5, Funny

      So women can show their hoo-ha, but I can't show my ting-ting? Where's the ACLU on this one?

      They moved on to the third grade.

      --
      No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
    2. Re:Blatant Sexism by flaming+error · · Score: 2, Funny

      > I can't show my ting-ting?
      Dude, this is the internet. Exaggerate. Call it a dong-dong. Why sell yourself short?

  11. Whatever. by garcia · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Chatroulette has long featured the rawest side of humanity -- copulating couples, men taking their pants off, and so on. But it also allows for a potentially rewarding (and potentially lucrative) random human connection, and that's what interests investors.

    While for me Chatroulette was nothing more than a one-time novelty and an interesting experiment by Ben Folds, I understand it may have a larger value to others. Unfortunately this sounds like Chatroulette is suddenly going to suck the same dicks they are eliminating because someone wants to make a buck.

    Let it continue on in the way it has or let it die. Let's stop bastardizing stuff because a bunch of investors don't like others seeing the raging members sticking out from their foreheads.

    1. Re:Whatever. by citylivin · · Score: 5, Informative

      "While for me Chatroulette was nothing more than a one-time novelty and an interesting experiment by Ben Folds"

      Well I don't know who "ben folds" is, but chatroulette was started by a russian teen programmer named Andrey Ternovskiy, who had positive experiences meeting people of other cultures in his uncles(?) Moscow based tourist shop. He tried to recreate this on the web. His vision was random people in the world having video chats to each other, to share knowledge and experience.

      There was a whole newyorker article on chatroulette. I am not surprised that he is trying to monetize it, as he is young and had alot of interest stateside (as to be expected with any viral hit web 2.0 application).

      Just because it was a novelty *For You*, does not mean that you get to attribute your, shall we say "wild guesses" to the motivations and ideals behind the site. They discuss cocks and stuff in the new yorker article and it seemed to me that he was planning some sort of filtering to make it more usable. You are always going to get trolls if you have a purely anonymous fourm. Fighting trolls on the internet is a skill one has to acquire and adapt. This is what he seems to be doing, in a slightly comedic but genuinely interesting way. He seems like a bright kid, so i wouldnt write him off as a one hit wonder yet.

      "Let it continue on in the way it has or let it die. Let's stop bastardizing stuff because a bunch of investors don't like others seeing the raging members"

      You seem to be under the mistaken impression that chatroulette was designed to display cocks. Raging members might be what your biases have led you to focus on, but it was never "the way" of the site, any more than slashdots way is penis birds or gnaa trolls. Perhaps if you actually read a bit more about the topic before commenting, you wouldn't be so mistaken in your key assumptions. (you must be old here, mr 4 digit userid!)

      --
      As a potential lottery winner, I totally support tax cuts for the wealthy
    2. Re:Whatever. by shermo · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well I don't know who "ben folds" is,

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTwJetox_tU

      He calls himself Merton, but people think it's Ben Folds.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Folds

      In the second one that he released he says he's not Ben Folds, but that doesn't stop rumours.

      --
      Insanity: voting in the same two parties over and over again and expecting different results
  12. escalation by Black+Parrot · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This will just result in games where people try to post non-genital pics that get filtered and genital pics that don't.

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    1. Re:escalation by TubeSteak · · Score: 2, Informative

      Maybe they can hire Goatse Security to consult.
      /snicker

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
  13. How about a face recognision algorithm instead? by 91degrees · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Faces are a much better understood problem. And since all most of the users want is to see people face to face refusing to show the image (or at least providing a warning) if no face is present would be a much easier solution.

    1. Re:How about a face recognision algorithm instead? by Issarlk · · Score: 5, Funny

      Awesome! That would lead to an hilarious wave of penises wearing Groucho glasses.

    2. Re:How about a face recognision algorithm instead? by PsychoticSpoon · · Score: 2, Funny

      Let's hope it's not made by HP and accidentally filters out darker skinned people.

  14. Re:You want to see my id? by somaTh · · Score: 2, Funny

    I hope the filter is hard on people. They need to understand there are stiff rules.

    --
    Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
  15. Re:"View picture"? by cayenne8 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    As long as they don't use this to keep BREASTS from being shown!??!?

    Female, that is.....

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  16. Re:GREAT IDEA! by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 4, Informative

    You're never going to out-grief the trolls.

    Woah - hold up a second. Thats a great idea. No you see what they are trying is not to grief the trolls, but keep them out of the system. The idea of outgriefing a troll is an excellent idea, it should be taken to the next step.

    Instead of disconnecting or dropping a user that shows his penis, instead flood his browser with tons of gay porn and goatse. Then, cause a whole bunch of message box popups that he can't get out of without killing the browser process.

    And thats just an idea off the top of my head. I think if you put more thought into it, you could find some great ways to out-grief the trolls.

  17. This sounds like the worst job ever... by hajihill · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm going out on a bit of a limb here, so bear with me if you wood...

    But seriously, figuring out an algorithm to ID wangs; sounds like those developers are going to be eyebrow deep in junk for a while. That's a job, much like plumbing, that I can appreciate for the value of the product, but can't fathom the drive to devote oneself to.

    --
    Of blankness, I know nothing.
    1. Re:This sounds like the worst job ever... by Locke2005 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Pity you've never met any software developers that weren't straight males...

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    2. Re:This sounds like the worst job ever... by Kozz · · Score: 2, Funny

      ...figuring out an algorithm to ID wangs; sounds like those developers are going to be eyebrow deep in junk for a while...

      Actually, I very much doubt there could be found a good algorithm. I mean, machines can only do so much but I expect the best work to be done by hand.

      --
      I only post comments when someone on the internet is wrong.
  18. What by jsegal205 · · Score: 5, Funny

    about all those times I am sitting on ChatRoulette eating hotdogs?

  19. Members' members... by stakovahflow · · Score: 3, Funny

    It looks like the line that reads:
    "...hopes that blocking the offending members will help clean up Chatroulette's reputation."
    should read:
    "...hopes that blocking the offending members' members will help clean up Chatroulette's reputation."

    Just my $0.02...

    --Stak

    --
    Holy happy hippy crap!
  20. Re:My Own Special Effort by Rude+Turnip · · Score: 2, Funny

    I put up a sign advertising my web site and let it run all day. With so many naked people, I figured there must be a market for clothing.

    --
    Bill Clinton: Pimp we can believe in. - The Shirt!!!
  21. I never thought I'd say "thanks for the... by arc86 · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...cockblock"

  22. False Positives? by mojo17 · · Score: 3, Funny

    It'll be interesting when they start getting false positives: "Sorry dude, but you actually DO look like a dick."

  23. Hope this works by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 2, Interesting

    When I first heard about Chatroulette, I thought "what a cool idea?" Then, when I heard about how many sickos are wanking and flashing wiener, that killed it for me. I don't think this algorithm will work, but if they can figure something out before they get branded as that "cock flashing website" they'll probably bring in more prudish people like me.

    --
    I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
  24. What? by guspasho · · Score: 4, Funny

    "I wonder if someone has told Andrey how well it went for Napster?"

    I didn't realize that Napster's failure was due to its single-minded focus on creating a genital recognition system.

  25. Quality Assurance by kiehlster · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'd hate to be on the QA team that gets to test that "feature"... Charlie, can you please stop pulling out your thing and just use a dildo like the rest of us?

  26. Do you want to play a game? by TiggertheMad · · Score: 5, Funny

    I thought the whole point of chatroulette was a gamble between seeing an actual person or just a dude jacking off.

    Like global thermonuclear war, "The only way to win is not to play".

    --

    HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
    1. Re:Do you want to play a game? by Minwee · · Score: 4, Funny

      "The only way to win is not to play"

      ...with yourself.

  27. This will only lead to disguises by wykell · · Score: 2, Funny

    Like the miniature sombrero and fake mustache I already wear on my wang when on CR. You can never be too safe on the internet...

    --
    --- He advocated thrift and hard work and disapproved of loose women who turned him down. ---
  28. Re:"View picture"? by nashv · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Er, breasts are not genitals. So I think we're safe there.

    --
    Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem.
  29. But Not Female? by nurb432 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Cool.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  30. this is an extremely difficult problem by Michael+Kristopeit · · Score: 3, Interesting

    i did a general pornography detection filter as a final project in an image processing class my senior year of undergraduate college... their best hope is around 90% detection with ~15% false positives. for the applications i was shooting for, that wasn't acceptable... for chatroulette, it might be, but even at 95% you're still getting 1/20th of the dicks. if most people on the network are dicks, that might still mean getting a dick almost every time. might as well just start selling boner pills and embrace your market rather than attempt to squash it.

  31. Was that a pun? by uassholes · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Offending members". He he.

  32. Re:"View picture"? by DurendalMac · · Score: 3, Funny

    I've only seen real, live boobies once on Chatroulette, and I'm not even sure they were human. Looked more like a friggin' whale. She got upset when I asked her to do the truffle shuffle.

  33. the obvious by muphin · · Score: 2, Insightful

    i have seen some sort of basic filter in place because when i click through all i get are guys hiding, then jump out showing their wang, or covering it then then show it.

    will this filter check every frame of every cam out there? pretty hard to do...
    as another user here said its probably better using a reputation system to knock down the ones you know and apply the filter to that.
    this also brings up anonymity issues, will/can users be identified? ...

    --
    It's not a typo if you understood the meaning!