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."

Too small pics

This is indeed a creative way to enhance the search results. Some of the pictures could be a little bit larger though.. Or some kind of a mouse-over which shows a larger picture.

looks good

its just taken me 4 minutes to accumulate ~1000 points, there are people who have accumulated 190000 points.

Thats playing the google game solidly for around 12 hours (less if they are good).

Congrats to those people!

As for myself, I found the image sizes too small, but I suppose we are basing the keywords on first impressions and are expected to come from the image search.

I found myself squinting to see what it was meant to be and wasting time, even if it was just 2x larger (scaled would do, no real need for more data) I would spend time there, its actually quite fun especially since you are aiming to get more than your random competitor.

Geez that's addictive

I'm not sure why... Google's brilliance shines through again.

Re:Geez that's addictive

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. [google.com]

Re:Scaling the small images

The FireFox image zoom extension (among others) imitate the behavior the GP described.

Oh boy, points

And those points will get me what?

Re:Oh boy, points

And those points will get me what?

1 point is spider rings, 2 points for a moustache comb, 10 points are plastic soldiers, 250 points for a mini slinky and so on. And for 5 gigapoints you can win an RC car or boat.

Re:Oh boy, points

It is like levelling up in world of warcraft, just without the grinding and monthly fees. Great deal!

Re:Oh boy, points

They're redeemable for bragging rights at the Google ePenis Store (Beta).

Re:Oh boy, points

Well, I just tried it and told my wife that I have 500 google points. Apparantly, 500 google points is worth a long lecture about the time I should be spending with my daughter. I'm hoping that 1000 google points will get me something better, but I've been wrong about these things before...

Re:Oh boy, points

I heard that 20.000 points gets you a divorce.

Re:Oh boy, points

You can have the last laugh though; pay her alimony in Google Points.

"What, 2,000,000 Google Points isn't enough for you?! You're bleeding me dry you bitch!"

Re:Oh boy, points

Was she spending time with your daughter while giving you this lecture?

Maybe you should talk to her about that.

Slender Neck Pr0n

I wonder, will they provide an option for only labeling porn images?

I tried it.

I went to this site. I was paired with someone, then presented with my image. It was one I recognised, the 'broken image link' glyph. I tagged 'broken' and '404' among other things.
I didn't get one tag in common with my partner!

People's competitive nature

I think it's pretty ridiculous, but I do find myself competing for ranking in the system. It's human nature to be competitive, and I know from experience that I'm competitive in even some rather ridiculous circumstances.

It's actually a lot more fun (and social) than many computer games I've played, because it's not just about finding applicable labels, but labels that you think the other person will guess. Also looking at what kinds of things matched before gives you some feeling of who you're partnered with, and what words they will likely use.

To me this looks like a winner, for Google at least. And you know what? If this is entertainment, and it helps people find the information they need, I don't mind doing "work" for Google, not one bit. So far they've been very good to me, and as long as that keeps up, I can't feel bad for supporting them.

Eyes of the Calculor

Google is now harnessing a distributed operating system, you and me. They use games to get us to essentially program for them and reduce error by having multiple people do the same task and use what answers come out.

Very clever. Of course this was done by Amazon as well I think and I dont know what has come of that effort.

But it really means that they are using the processing power of people to avoid having to create artificial intelligence. And why not? Just use real intelligence from people and let them enjoy it by thinking it is a game!

Definitely BETA!

This is quite definitely beta stuff. Maybe alpha. In particular, the "pass" system seems borked. I came across an image that was unidentifiable, and clicked "Pass." It said, "Waiting on your partner to pass." Long, dreary seconds ticked by, and then it said "Your partner wants to pass." ... ???

Why yes! I'd be glad to agree with my partner's request, except that I ALREADY SENT a pass request, and now the button is greyed out.

This happened several times. The first time, we were almost done anyway, so I let the timer expire. Guess what? If time expires while in this confused "we both want to pass but the system isn't working" state, then it doesn't actually complete the sequence (ie redirect you to the "completion" page). It just sits there, leaving you no choice but to manually return to the beginning page.

Also, people are dumb. I got a picture of a mountain road bordered by pine trees with a large cloud on the horizon. So over the course of about twenty seconds I suggested:

- Cloud
- Mountain
- Road
- Trees
- Pine Trees
- Thunderhead
- Cars
- Car

My partner still hadn't suggested any terms. So I suggested:

- nincompoop
- light weight
- My partner is an idiot

None of those matched, thankfully.

Finding a decent partner is hard

I played about 10 times. 9 out of the 10 times, I got really lame people who mostly wanted to pass. 1 time, I got someone who was actually mentally engaged in the game and we got 900 points. It would be fun to do better, but if finding a non-retarded partner is typically such a pain, I'm not sure if it's worth it.

First step

This is just Google struggling to become self-aware. No need for concern...

--

I am, therefore I should think

Buggy as hell

Dunno if it's the slashdot effect, or just poor programming, but the site is buggy as hell:

• Often shows broken images
• If you try to login, it pretends you've disabled cookies, even if they are enabled
• When it says "Your partner has asked to pass", and you click on pass, it goes to "Waiting on your partner to pass.", even though he already has passed.

Re:Wow, how 2-years ago!

Technically google didn't rip of the ESP game. From this article http://blog.searchenginewatch.com/blog/060901-0943 09 [searchenginewatch.com] It seems Google officially licensed the game.

Re:Wow, how 2-years ago!

Google licensed the game. Luis von Ahn even gave a lecture at Google some time ago (which you can watch here [google.com])

Re:Content Based Image Retrieval

At the end, it says "Thanks for your contribution. It will help us improve the relevance of image search results so that you and other Google users can quickly and easily find the results you're looking for." Which is better at recognising what's in a picture? A human, who can say "oh look, that's Natalie Portman pouring hot grits down her pants", not a computer which will just say "a person" at best.

Actually Google Licensed It

Danny Sullivan reported that Luis von Ahn granted use of his ESP Game through licensing. http://blog.searchenginewatch.com/blog/060901-0943 09 [searchenginewatch.com]