Anybody notice on Google Maps that every face is blurred out?
I just find this amazing. Every single person you see on street view is blurred out. How - in code wise - is this even possible? I noticed this today when messing around...
As far as I was aware they have google vans that drive around and take the photos so all they would have to do is blue out the faces before uploading.
License plates are also blurred, and numbers on walls, doors, etc. are semiautomatically (OCR with human eyeball fallback) recognized to generate street numbers.
Of course, even with these measures, some people are just not happy.
http://bit.ly/1Aiatc8
Of course, even with these measures, some people are just not happy.
http://bit.ly/1Aiatc8
Well it started in 2007 and they are still working on it.
For more information visit:
https://www.google.com/intl/en-US/maps/about/behind-the-scenes/streetview/
https://www.google.com/intl/en-US/maps/about/behind-the-scenes/streetview/privacy/#streetview
For more information visit:
https://www.google.com/intl/en-US/maps/about/behind-the-scenes/streetview/
| Individuals and license plates are blurred We have developed cutting-edge face and license plate blurring technology that is applied to all Street View images. This means that if one of our images contains an identifiable face (for example that of a passer-by on the sidewalk) or an identifiable license plate, our technology will automatically blur it out, meaning that the individual or the vehicle cannot be identified. If our algorithms missed something, you can easily let us know. |
https://www.google.com/intl/en-US/maps/about/behind-the-scenes/streetview/privacy/#streetview
Last edited on
The algorithms aren't perfect, for example lots of images have apparently random details blurred out, where some innocuous detail has been mistaken for either a face or a car registration plate.
Facial recognition is quite common, modern cameras can identify faces in an image and attempt to auto-focus on the face rather than the background. One camera even had a feature where it would offer to delete the image if the subject was not smiling, or something of that sort (I've forgotten the full details) - though I think that is going rather too far.
Also, facial recognition goes far beyond that. Security cameras in the street or public spaces may be able to identify say a suspected criminal, or some person of interest, and highlight that person if they should appear. Another possibility was to selectively track an individual in a crowd, and keep track of that same person as they moved across town from one camera to another.
Facial recognition is quite common, modern cameras can identify faces in an image and attempt to auto-focus on the face rather than the background. One camera even had a feature where it would offer to delete the image if the subject was not smiling, or something of that sort (I've forgotten the full details) - though I think that is going rather too far.
Also, facial recognition goes far beyond that. Security cameras in the street or public spaces may be able to identify say a suspected criminal, or some person of interest, and highlight that person if they should appear. Another possibility was to selectively track an individual in a crowd, and keep track of that same person as they moved across town from one camera to another.
Last edited on
closed account (9wqjE3v7)
Route destinations on London Buses are blurred out and mistaken for registration plates too.
| Also, facial recognition goes far beyond that. Security cameras in the street or public spaces may be able to identify say a suspected criminal, or some person of interest, and highlight that person if they should appear. Another possibility was to selectively track an individual in a crowd, and keep track of that same person as they moved across town from one camera to another. |
| I think you may be overestimating the picture quality of CCTV cameras. |
That is true. However I was stating what is already theoretically possible, and the obstacles are mainly down to cost or other mundane reasons, rather than technical limitations.
License plates should be very easy to blur out - They're all the same! The have the same amount of characters, and will have a state name above the numbers. I don't know too many objects in the world that resemble license plates.
closed account (z05DSL3A)
| License plates should be very easy to blur out - They're all the same! The have the same amount of characters, and will have a state name above the numbers. I don't know too many objects in the world that resemble license plates. |
Take a random stroll through some here:
http://www.worldlicenseplates.com
Last edited on
| I don't know too many objects in the world that resemble license plates. |
closed account (z05DSL3A)
| I think you may be overestimating the picture quality of CCTV cameras. |
In 20011 they where testing systems at Manchester Airport to Tag and Track suspicious people.
http://www.theengineer.co.uk/sectors/military-and-defence/news/surveillance-system-tags-and-tracks-suspicious-individuals/1008855.article
Sure, but a CCTV camera in an airport will be closer to the ground and indoors, compared to one on the street. Additionally, someone in a queue moves slower than when walking down the street.
closed account (z05DSL3A)
"CCTV systems capable of identifying and tracking a person's face from half a mile away are turning Britain into a Big Brother society, the UK's first surveillance commissioner has warned."
-- New HD CCTV puts human rights at risk
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/new-hd-cctv-puts-human-rights-at-risk-8194844.html
-- New HD CCTV puts human rights at risk
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/new-hd-cctv-puts-human-rights-at-risk-8194844.html
Last edited on
Fair enough. I wasn't aware CCTV technology had advanced so much.
What's the deal with the UK, anyway? It's like every other news article I see about it talks about some new surveillance system they're implementing that pushes further and further past the limit of the objectionable and into the limit of the downright creepy.
Well, at least they're doing it domestically, unlike the US.
What's the deal with the UK, anyway? It's like every other news article I see about it talks about some new surveillance system they're implementing that pushes further and further past the limit of the objectionable and into the limit of the downright creepy.
Well, at least they're doing it domestically, unlike the US.
I would be wary of what you read in the newspapers. Even supposedly-respectable papers like The Guardian and The Independent have been caught peddling exaggerated and downright fabricated stories.
closed account (z05DSL3A)
The media have had a field day reporting this sort of thing since the Edward Snowden revelation. Paranoia and outrage sell.
Last edited on
Topic archived. No new replies allowed.