Google Expanding “Image Search”

That's friggin' cool!

I grabbed on of my wallpapers and it was found as a screenshot on some Portugese gaming site.  http://goo.gl/P3djC

This is otherwise known as the trademark and copyright service, "Big Brother".  Next I expect Google and Facebook to announce joint development of a project to track any individual in the world anywhere they go while documenting everything they are doing.

Mixed feelings here.

I can only think of one application for this, and it requires deactivating safe search.

I believe any tool can be used for good or for bad...

You can frustrate facebook's facial recognition software by not having pics on it... 

Seems to work well.

Yes--I did that...until other people took pictures with me in them posted them to Facebook without saying anything and then people who knew me "tagged" them.

I have already slipped on this slope.

I actually think it's cool and useful but I have been around too long not to be cynical becasue I know of the people out there who will delightedly abuse it.

 Now that the last "Not Evil" company is evil it's hard to have hope.

Precisely!  Always question Google's motives/agenda... trust it like you would a rattlesnake.

I think think this every time I something Google... and thus I use nothing that is Google... block everything that is Google.

Yes, Google trawls this site and knows who I am, what I'm saying, but I don't give a rat's and will continue to speak against it.

Whether it be with tongue-in-cheek or deadly serious I'm going to speak my mind and denounce Google for what it is... EVIL.

Sadly, with this facial recognition software causing privacy issues, and rightfully so, this is just another step toward the global domination Google seeks.  It will use this technology to advance its over-all control over the www and those who use it.

I was reading just a few days ago that the large Australian retailers are seeking to install facial recognition type software in order to offer shoppers [anyone who enters the store] goods based on gender, apparent mood and current dress sense, etc.... using Google search to match them with consumables, etc.  I have serious issues with this.  One that it is linked to Google.. two, that customers have more than enough hard-sell thrust upon them as it is, without exacerbating their plight with personalised hard selling based on a friggin' photo of them... a photo, BTW, they did not consent to.

For me, that is taking the use of technology way too far... that soon you won't be able to blow your nose without some greedy mongrel retailer coming over with a range of products based on the consistency of your snot that day.  Okay, maybe that's a bit extreme, but Google and these bastards seek to part people from their cash at every opportunity... and to some extent, some people deserve it, what with smart fridges that do all their grocery shopping for them.

Shoot, I have mobility issues that often hamper my going out, but I'm not that lazy that I'd get my fridge to order everything and then have it delivered. Sure people are busier these days, but that is the pits if you're not bed-ridden/house-bound.  If not, you should get off yer friggin' arse and make the effort yourself.  Yes, I shop online occasionally, but only for overseas items [Srardock products for example] or stuff [from Sydney/Melbourne, etc} that I can't source locally.

For mine, Google preys upon people who are too lazy to get out of their own way, and believe me, Google sees you as exactly that, every time you search for products to purchase, online or otherwise.  Whatever happened to shopping around the stores until you locate the items you need/want?

Oh, and this rant isn't directed at anyone in particular, and certainly nobody here, just society in general, anywhere in the world.  In essence, we've become too soft as a species, and the greed of Google/big business is set to exploit that to the max.

I saw a movie with Sylvester Stalone and Wesley Snipes as adversaries. In this movie he was frozen in a big ice cube and thawed out to catch a crook, Wesley Snipes. In this new world there had been restaurant wars and the only one to survive was Taco Bell. Starkers mentioned Google's aspirations for world domination. Imagine a world where all the AdWare people like Google engaged in a war where Google comes out on top or...gets blown away by a competitor. Not too far fetched I think. Either that or it'll make for a good laugh.

I saw that movie as well... can't remember the name off-hand but I did enjoy watching it.

As for a competitor knocking off Google?  While that would be good on the one hand, on the other it'd be scary as hell because the competitor would likely be more evil and we'd all be worse off.

Oh, and is Apple getting on the world domination bandwagon?  I've noticed it before but never really thought about it until now.... but Apple computers, phones and iPads appear prominently in just about all the Aussie soapies and quite a few of our dramas.  Hmmm, deliberately inserted into strategic positions to influence viewers to buy Apple products.  Bastards!!!!  If this catches on and iProducts become the in thing, I could be struggling to find PC parts to build Windows rigs.  Yup, a conspiracy going on right under our noses and nobody is noticing. 

Nope, they're too consumed watching the twaddle that is Aussie TV of late.

Demolition Man.  I thought the movie was funny.  It also had Rob Schneider and Sandra Bullock in it.  The "joy-joy" movie.

It was an campy satire of PC. 

If you want a more realistic comparison--Minority Report. 

The scenes where Tom Cruise walks by retinal scanners placed at every public entrance and embedded in every advertising sign.  Custom ads display and address him by name when he walks by a business display and the police are able to track his every move through the public facial/retinal recognition cameras.

And believe it or not, James Cameron's accelerated development of hi-res 3D motion cameras and facial interpretive software have actually made all this a step closer.

Don't forget Kinect....

You mean, "Skynet".

Seriously though, the software alone approach to facial/mood/identity recognition has made large strides over the past few years--very large ones--but Cameron's nifty 3D camera--and the software that came with it put the potential for usable, real-time, "right now" use of facial recognition into play.  The ability to better "see" the 3D features of the face (and body) let the software advancements that have been developed really come to the fore.  Cameron's facial and body motion capture algorithms also help build on a library of biometric signatures and add a new layer of depth to them.

One step closer.

I told my wife back in 1995 that she'd see the day when police walked around with sunglasses with embedded 2-way cameras and a computer HUD capability--all connected wirelessly to the station.  They'll no longer have to look for suspects--their new eyes will point them out when they are in view.  The cops won't even have to recognize them--the glasses tied to a databse will do all that for them.  They'll even be able over time to determine general emotional states and eventually even indicate when people are lying.

It's all very cool and I appreciate the benign uses of it--but imagine if an Assad, Ahmadinejad or Kim Jong-il have them.  The implications regarding privacy and even innocence get eroded greatly even in a free society and in a totalitarian society it is literally "a nightmare come true".

We have short-sighted and business/crony/lobby interest  politicians running the world and the hope that adequate safeguards and protections for the individuals will come along with these new technologies is currently dismal.  Business will jump at the opportunity for "more data" that allows for more manipulation and control of their customer.

welcome--just give me all bank account so i can transfer these Nigerian funds and you're in!

Wow--whats with the posts I read and then they vanish after I reply?

Google doesn't like you, Sinperium... pretty soon there'll be no one but you here... and then... *poof - no you, either. Just a hole in the post where you used to be.

So it's true...you are all figments of my imagination.

Somehow I knew you couldn't all be for real.

Google doesn't like anyone... just Google.  Everyone else is a means to an end... accumulated profit.

Hopefully, its clients [and users] will soon see it for what it is, grow a conscience, then sever all ties in protest against the evil that is Google.

I recently saw a blurb that indicated a city in Brazil and eliminated all advertisinf sign sin side the city limits.  No moe big ads pained on buildings, etc.  I think it was San Paulo?  Not sure...  I was surprised that the city actually was able to take on the marketers....

Oh, starkers.. you are so right.  But about some google clients growing a conscience - don't count on it.  Clinets are mostly corporations.  And coroprations don't have souls - (or whatever).  They will, if 'markets' force them (-ie consumer choices) do more 'green' things, etc - but they won't grow a conscience.  They all are a clever shell game designed to separate individual profit taking from individual responsibility.  As long as capital is free to do its thing through corporations - the evil will contine and grow until it collapses hard enought that even the governements cant bail it out.   There have been several collapses that the Fed and US Govt 'successfully' preventing from going system wide.   Its only a matter of time before greedy 'insiders' 'manipulate' sufficient assets from the corporations that it all crashes.  Google is merely one corp who will help 'connect' them all even more efficiently than they were before.  The truly sad thing about this is it will also probably turn whats left of democratic governments into 'soft' facist states whose primary concern is to protect the ultra wealthy.

That really pissed me off... the Fed bailing out greedy US banks.  That's one of the most stupidest things any government ever did.   It would have been better for the world as a whole to let them go under and start afresh with new banks and banking regulations that prevented the rampant greed and irresponsibility of former institutions.  Yes, it would have taken some effort and organising, but with the money Obama threw at the banks, it could have been done.  Sadly, it wasn't and we'll be back at square one due to the inherent greed of banks.

Actually, that mightn't be such a bad thing... to crash all the stock markets and start trading in 'real' goods again, rather than electronic funds and/or money that doesn't exist except on paper/computer hard-drives.  Maybe then we can get back to manufacturing based economies with tangible products.  All this: "The New York Stock Exchange just lost billions at the push of a button." is total crap.  The funds never truly existed to begin with, but rather an electronic bank note issued by some banker with an even bigger greed. 

And that's why I despise bankers intensely.  Often times they will say to companies and/or individuals,"we've got your ass covered", when in reality no actual  money changes hands, yet the bank is laughing all the way to the bank because it can call in the 'debt' when due and take everything they own.  It happened to a friend of mine when his business was flooded and the insurance company refused to pay out on a technicality in the 'fine print'.  The bank put up the capital and 'deposited' it in his business account as a surety, not working capital.  However, when the 'loan' was due and he hadn't quite gotten back on his feet, the bank tried to repossess all his assets.. house included.  Fortunately, loyal customers came to his assistance to avert that situation, but in reality, the bank never parted with any cash. To him it was an intangible electronic transfer that he had no access to and therefore could not spend/deplete... so did he really owe it?  The bank said so

As for Google and it's clients, you are right... they have no consciences and will continue to exploit the public to reap unabated profit at any cost and by any means possible.  I just wish more consumers had my mentality and boycotted the greediest companies to show their disgust.  There are several retailers and businesses here in OZ that I point blank refuse to shop/deal with due to greed and unsavoury business practices.  I don't care if they have a special on an item I might need or want, as often times I can get that item elsewhere at a competitive price just by referring to the advertised price and asking.

wow....    interesting to see where your stuff gets around to.....    

i'm an avatar on steam community in Korea..... 

http://steamcommunity.com/id/xsinthis?l=korean

and renamed, non permissioned on wallpaper sites... 

http://abstract.desktopnexus.com/wallpaper/521783/

http://wall.alphacoders.com/big.php?i=93322

and here with Stripe Poker stuff...

http://www.marketwallpapers.com/wallpapers/explore-screensavers-unlock-venom--166676.html

the list goes on.....  

thanks doc.... vellly interlesting....    

I logged in and posted a "Taken without permission" comment.

Wonder how long it will last. I's advise sending a DMCA notice (in one of Jafo's sticky posts, I believe) to the sites involved. Getting action is another matter altogether.

As I implied, this tool (as well as Tineye) can be used for good ends: Catching thieves and dealing with them!

Starkers:  They are not 'bankers,'  they are really "banksters."  You might be interested to know that even some ancients Greeks (Classical era) wondered about those 'persons' who came to the agora with 'cash' traded, bought, sold, etc., and left the agora with only cash.  (usually more than they came in with...)

While The Cap'n and I agree on Google, I will qualify my agreement here and say that is true for almost all companies.  Companies, while being legal individuals in one sense, are still an inanimate object in that sense.  They reflect the culture of their owners, and employees, and rarely do a ton of people agree on one thing.  By not agreeing, they then become frozen through inaction (no consensus), and can do nothing as a result.  The appearance is then one of not liking anyone.

There are notable exceptions, but these are companies that usually have 2 things in common:

#1 - they are not huge (fortune 500)

#2 - The entrepreneur that started it still runs it.