Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Submission + - Massive Tinder Photo Scrape Has Users Upset (techcrunch.com)

Frosty Piss writes: Images of Tinder users posting their sexiest selfies were swept up in a massive grab of some 40,000 photos from the dating app by a dataset collector who plans to use the selfies in artificial intelligence training, reports TechCrunch. Tinder said in a statement that the photo sweeper “violated the terms of our service” and “we are taking appropriate action and investigating further.” The creator of the data set, Stuart Colianni, has released it under a CC0: Public Domain License and also uploaded his scraper script to GitHub. He describes it as a “simple script to scrape Tinder profile photos for the purpose of creating a facial dataset,” saying his inspiration for creating the scraper was disappointment working with other facial data sets. He also describes Tinder as offering “near unlimited access to create a facial data set” and says scraping the app offers “an extremely efficient way to collect such data.”

Comment Re:Really? (Score 1) 58

He does have a point in that anything owned and operated by the general public tends to be maintained to a lower standard than anything owned and operated in an industry which has rigorous maintenance standards and penalties for not following them, such as the airline industry...

Nobody is trying to sell flying cars to the mass public- yet? I hope not, too. The flying cars which will actually be overhead any time soon will all belong to corporations, possibly the ride"sharing" companies, maybe taxi companies. Maybe Google, or Amazon, who knows.

Even with private aircraft and pilots, the pre-flight walk rounds can take more time than the flight - precisely because it is necessary to ensure some level of safety.

Well, it's going to be a whole lot less necessary with aircraft which resemble nothing so much as a scaled up R/C quadcopter. Presumably most of them will be at least octocopters, with at least one design which is supposedly going to be in the air immediately using a four-boom octo design. They're all solid state and have only a handful of moving parts, and wear of bearings can be measured using microphones. Batteries will be continually monitored (as in, 24x7x365) and evaluated by software so that their condition is always known. Any component which seems the least bit iffy will be swapped out (trivially) so that the aircraft can be restored to service.

I still don't look forward to seeing them overhead, I think that there are better solutions. But maintenance is actually the least of my concerns. I'm more worried about allowed areas, flight paths, fundamental hardware and software design issues, etc. The hardware is actually pretty simple, but that doesn't mean people won't get it wrong. The software is not simple, and there's lots of room to botch it.

Comment Re:Really? (Score 2) 58

Most airplanes are circumscribed to landing and taking off in special areas called airports and their use is highly regulated. That diminishes somewhat the worries people have of seeing their neighbors (who they've seen driving into trees and parked cars) attempting to master flight.

Comment Re:Look at all the anti vehicle protection round p (Score 2) 58

If flying cars are available the defenses will be useless.

They already are, if that's what you mean by useless. It's already possible to practice flying in simulation, then get some manuals and learn how to actually start up a plane, then stroll onto an airfield someplace and steal one since so many of them have basically no security.

You won't be allowed to control a flying taxi manually, and they will be totally dependent on their computers to fly so you're not going to be trivially overriding them from inside the cockpit.

Comment Typically Boring Comment (Score 3, Interesting) 58

He also doesn't like them because his company, The Boring Company, wants to provide a competing transportation solution.

He also doesn't like them because people will report on that, and then people will talk about his boring company. It's extremely profitable dislike.

On the other hand, I agree with him. Adding more air traffic is inefficient at best.

On the third hand, there's probably plenty of places where tunnels won't work. That's not a reason not to build tunnels where they will work, but we still need something which handles those situations. I still like elevated PRT.

Comment Re:One man's picky is another man's prudent (Score 1) 77

But the wealthy told us that if we gave them all of our money, they would create jobs!

Seriously, the element missing from your story is that they're spending people's retirement funds on this shit while the one-percenters are literally just sitting on cash that could be invested in such business ventures. Didn't they tell us that's what they were going to do with the money? Invest it, and create jobs?

Comment Re:So do tell (Score 1) 133

The last military contract I worked on -- a number of decades ago -- was a system that ran on a computer built to military standards using discrete transistors -- none of those fancy IC things. It was nowhere near as powerful as the PC-XTs in our office. But it would run equally poorly in the Arctic in January or the Middle East in July. And the computer would probably survive being inadvertently dropped off a truck by some high school dropout then run over by the next two vehicles in the convoy.

Sure, but for the price of maintaining an antique, you could probably put a more modern computer in every pocket...

Comment Re:4 out of 30 are French (Score 1) 61

The Democrat party lost because their leaders as a whole are the worst corporate tools that there has ever been.

What? And also what? The republicans are much worse. Much, much worse. Democrats occasionally try to help people. Republicans only try to help corporations. It's true that the Democrats lost because their leaders are corporate tools, but calm your hyperbole there, son.

Comment Re: Not a big deal (Score 1, Insightful) 117

I hope for your sake and for the rest of the democrats that you do some good soul searching prior to 2018 & 2020... otherwise you will be trounced again.

The DNC is still up to the same old tricks, refusing to support genuinely leftists candidates in favor of centrist tools of the corporatocracy. So yeah, expect a repeat.

Slashdot Top Deals

There are running jobs. Why don't you go chase them?

Working...