I'm lost on this one, any ideas?

This is more a question on automatic censorship, I'm not questioning a sites right to block images against its TOS. I'm assuming its a bot issue, maybe they did it more on taste :)

You might want to contact tumbr directly for clarification. This is odd, for sure.

Thanks Boni, I was using it as an excuse to find out what other experiences people had with bot censorship, I'll be closing my Tumblr account,

Tumblr confirmed its not adult. I've deleted my Tumblr account, not going to allow AI to control what is or is not acceptable.

Well, the sky fell in on Tumblr Monday. Thousands and thousands of Tumblrs got blocked, and thousands more had particular posts blocked as now-unacceptable adult content. They decided to get rid of all pornography. Sorry you got swept up in that ironsoul.

They basically totally changed Tumblr at the core.

Here's my dark-humor response to your "any ideas."

They might have a "Richard Strauss" detector in place now, because of his treatment of male/female characterization in his operas, so your image offended.

operaguy posted at 2:15PM Sat, 22 December 2018 - #4342334

Here's my dark-humor response to your "any ideas."

They might have a "Richard Strauss" detector in place now, because of his treatment of male/female characterization in his operas, so your image offended.

Now THAT'S an idea!

tumblr has had a limited issue with child porn being uploaded. this is nothing new. Facebook, Twitter etc all get it as well.

but rather than deal with it, which will cost a lot of money, they have elected to take the cheaper route of banning all adult material, penalizing legitimate users and effectively killing their site.

and it won't make any difference. the scum posting this material are breaking the law anyway, will saying "don't post it here" stop them?

I was using it as an excuse to find out what other experiences people had with bot censorship,

No opinion on the Tumblr matter( dont use it,dont care)

However Bots can not impose "censorship" Nor can private website admins/ moderators etc.

Only your Government can impose censorship with its prevailing authority to make constitutionally protected free speech/ expression subject to criminal prosecution.

A website is private property thus subject to the arbitrary standards of its owners or duly authorized agents and can subjectively filter the types of Data being uploaded to their Private servers or linked to in their publicly available forums.

Posting to concur 100% with what wolf just said. Only government can establish, execute, and maintain censorship.

::::: Opera :::::

If 'bot censorship' is not an acceptable word in this case we need a new one. For the puropse of the discussion let us use the word 'sensapping' for automated judgement of images for compliance with the rule that governs the realm. Let the software used be named 'sensapp'.

They've promised that their censor bots will learn and get better.

The mistakes have been pretty amusing. One person had nude pics up; it left those, and flagged an image of her fully clothed. I had a photo banned that was just someone's face. Not even the neck was showing, let alone any naughty bits. Others have had silly cat pics and photos of dishware banned.

I've found they're pretty quick to reinstate images mistakenly flagged. Just click the "review" button. It was 12 hours for the first image I challenged, and about 2 minutes for the second one.

This has actually been planned for a long time, and was probably inevitable as soon as it was sold to Yahoo/Verizon. Though the app being removed from the Apple store due to child porn issues affected the timing, it was coming anyway.

Basically, it comes down to money. Tumblr was hemorrhaging money. They need to "monetize" it if it's going to survive. And that means selling ads. They can't sell ads (at least, not the kind they need to sell) if they'll appear next to adult material.

Exactly, randym77

Well, that woman's naked under those clothes, what else do you expect!

Tumblr was bought by Verizooone and is run under Oath same as Yahoo and, America Online. They are busy destroying all three services, though in AOL's case it's hard to define "destroy" since it's been a wasteland pretty much since inception. These are also the people behind the demise of net neutrality. Ain't corporate America wonderful?

These are also the people behind the demise of net neutrality.

Net neutrality was doomed from the very beginning IMHO.

Soon Free broadband internet access will be as ubiquitous as running water in urban population centers. It is inevitable and Wifi will likely become a mandatory part of building codes.

Net neutrality was predicated upon the assumption that providers ability to reserver the higher bandwith for those affluent users able to pay would result in creating a subclass of users with less access to higher speeds.

This will always be the case with commercial services in a capaitalist system .

I recently waited two hours past my 12 PM dentist appoinment for three adult molar extractions because I not wealthy have "United Health" (aka)"obamacare".

OK ..Dental surgery cannot be performed over the internet.

However many adminstrative ,time consuming labor intensive federal& municpal services are being delivered online and will save goverments huge labor costs.

The ISP's can charge all they want for people/companies need to move huge amounts of Data. online. As of this moment ,people on food stamps, qualify for a free basic andriod smart phone and basic Data plan via "safelink" and "assurance wireless" . paid for by the federal goverment.

Here in New york there is a free broadband wi fi tower on every corner of downtown .Manhattan

Everyone has basic access for those ever increasing online based federal &state services.

wolf359 posted at 11:09PM Wed, 26 December 2018 - #4342484

I was using it as an excuse to find out what other experiences people had with bot censorship,

No opinion on the Tumblr matter( dont use it,dont care)

However Bots can not impose "censorship" Nor can private website admins/ moderators etc.

Only your Government can impose censorship with its prevailing authority to make constitutionally protected free speech/ expression subject to criminal prosecution.

A website is private property thus subject to the arbitrary standards of its owners or duly authorized agents and can subjectively filter the types of Data being uploaded to their Private servers or linked to in their publicly available forums.

Hate to disagree here, but this is a basic misunderstanding of what censorship really is. ANYONE can censor someone or something. The difference is that BECAUSE of the SECOND Amendment in the Constitution, the US Government is expressly forbidden FROM doing it except for certain instances.

While private websites can censor images and speech, they are subject to civil laws for which they can be sued.

One word: FCC

While private websites can censor images and speech, they are subject to civil laws for

which they can be sued.

Anyone can be sued in the civil courts ,as long as the complainant is willing to endure the legal costs of trying to prove material harm caused by the defendant.

When a non governmental entity enforces their arbitrary, subjective standards as to what Data/images can be uploaded to their web servers this is NOT "censorship" this is enforcement of private property rights.

The people who scream "censorship" over website/social media policies typically are having an emotional reaction to some private entity removing or blocking ,banning them from posting something they incorrectly thought that they somehow had the"right" to post.

wolf359 posted at 6:50AM Thu, 27 December 2018 - #4342565

While private websites can censor images and speech, they are subject to civil laws for

which they can be sued.

Anyone can be sued in the civil courts ,as long as the complainant is willing to endure the legal costs of trying to prove material harm caused by the defendant.

When a non governmental entity enforces their arbitrary, subjective standards as to what Data/images can be uploaded to their web servers this is NOT "censorship" this is enforcement of private property rights.

The people who scream "censorship" over website/social media policies typically are having an emotional reaction to some private entity removing or blocking ,banning them from posting something they incorrectly thought that they somehow had the"right" to post.

Again, I disagree, but you don't have to take my word for it. You can look up the definition on Google. Here's the one I got from Wikipedia. Note that they mention both government and private institutions.

Censorship - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication, or other information, on the basis that such material is considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or "inconvenient" as determined by a government or private institution, for example, corporate censorship.

wolf359 posted at 6:50AM Thu, 27 December 2018 - #4342565

_When a non governmental entity enforces their arbitrary, subjective standards as to what Data/images can be uploaded to their web servers this is NOT "censorship" this is enforcement of private property rights.

The people who scream "censorship" over website/social media policies typically are having an emotional reaction to some private entity removing or blocking ,banning them from posting something they incorrectly thought that they somehow had the"right" to post._

While that does happen, Private websites and social medias site DO occasionally censor people. Sometimes, it's an honest mistake, and sometimes, administrators, and monitors at the site, don't like the political message, the image, or the person and will block the message or take it down even though no rule has been violated. That's usually when you hear about those pesky "AI glitches".

Suggest digging a little deeper than Wikipedia and a randomly selected google search...

Oxford Reference (OED-based): Click for Oxford Reference article on censorship This clearly observes that censorship requires government establishment and enforcement. It even notes that "self-censorship" means "I got a threat from government to punish me if I don't take action. They have a the power to fine me or jail me or confiscate my license. So, I'll self-censor before they do so."

Censorship requires government legal enforcement.

I concede that the term "censoring" has drifted (or been pushed) from its essential definition of 'state control' into a slovenly 'slang' usage of "the owner of that thing is mean, and won't let me do what I want to do. I don't care if he thinks he owns it, I wanna and that's my right. He's censoring my rights." That is the pity, not the pride.

::::: Opera :::::

operaguy posted at 3:57PM Thu, 27 December 2018 - #4342587

Suggest digging a little deeper than Wikipedia and a randomly selected google search...

Oxford Reference (OED-based): Click for Oxford Reference article on censorship This clearly observes that censorship requires government establishment and enforcement. It even notes that "self-censorship" means "I got a threat from government to punish me if I don't take action. They have a the power to fine me or jail me or confiscate my license. So, I'll self-censor before they do so."

Censorship requires government legal enforcement.

I concede that the term "censoring" has drifted (or been pushed) from its essential definition of 'state control' into a slovenly 'slang' usage of "the owner of that thing is mean, and won't let me do what I want to do. I don't care if he thinks he owns it, I wanna and that's my right. He's censoring my rights." That is the pity, not the pride.

::::: Opera :::::

Hell, we can take your own reference since you doubt mine...

1. Any regime or context in which the content of what is publically expressed, exhibited, published, broadcast, or otherwise distributed is regulated or in which the circulation of information is controlled. The official grounds for such control at a national level are variously** political (e.g. national security), moral** (e.g. likelihood of causing offence or moral harm, especially in relation to issues of obscenity),** social** (e.g. whether violent content might have harmful effects on behaviour), or** religious** (e.g. blasphemy, heresy). Some rulings may be merely to avoid embarrassment (especially for governments).

2. A regulatory system for vetting, editing, and prohibiting particular forms of public expression, presided over by a censor: an official given a mandate by a governmental, legislative, or commercial body to review specific kinds of material according to pre-defined criteria. Criteria relating to public attitudes—notably on issues of ‘taste and decency’—can quickly become out-of-step.

Generally speaking, all it usually takes is for someone wishing to control what others hear, see or think. Your own cititation notes that private, religious and commercial entities also practice forms of censorship. As far as I know, the US Government is the only political governing body on the planet, that expressly forbids itself from the open practice.

Here's another cititation from the ACLU:

What Is Censorship? | American Civil Liberties Union https://www.aclu.org/other/what-censorship Censorship can be carried out by the government as well as private pressure groups. ... their actions are protected by the First Amendment, although they can become ... Pacifica, the Court ruled that the government could require radio and ...

FVerbaas posted at 10:38PM Thu, 27 December 2018 - #4342497

If 'bot censorship' is not an acceptable word in this case we need a new one. For the puropse of the discussion let us use the word 'sensapping' for automated judgement of images for compliance with the rule that governs the realm. Let the software used be named 'sensapp'.

Yet a war broke out on the word 'censor'. Nobody questioned the right of the authority of the realm to impose rules on publications in the realm. Question was how we feel about using a sensapp to decide whether a publication in the realm can be tolerated. The nature of the publications (images) is such that the parameters that drive the rules are in terms of human perception, not in hard numbers. The technology used to solve this sort of problems is artificial intelligence. Artificial intelligence by definition uses fuzzy logic, which is an extrapolation of what the verdict of a group of experts would be if they judged to formulated rules. In the algorithm that is actually applied, there are no formulated rules only the result of training. The database that was used to train the AI is not published. The question is particular sensitive because the output of the AI is a yes/no black/white decision. Of course if ratings go between 0.0 and 2000, and publication can be only if end rating is at least 1000, 1000.0001 is more than 1000 and can stay, and 999.9999 is less than 1000 and must go. If the amount of 'flesh color' on the image counts in the degree of 'pornographicness', changing the reflectiveness of a side prop can make the difference.

@EClark1894

Okay, you win a small victory: I agree that even my citation conflates government censorship -- conducted with legal authority to jail or fine -- with the actions of private institutions to withdraw or expel content or members, etc, -- a power that does not included legal authority to jail or fine. This is corruption of the term "censorship" of the kind I described in my "slovenly 'slang'" paragraph, which you ignored.

ACLU is a political football club with an agenda. So ... not a reliable authority on 'censorship.' (sarcasm)

You might be claiming the Constitution forbids FedGov from censorship, but "somehow" -- loaded with legal authority -- it has become rife with powerful censorship and controls. No other entity possess this legal shotgun. It has become censorship manifest in many ways.

Do you think it should be illegal for Tumblr to "control what others hear, see or think" on its private property?

[mods: is it okay to have a political discussion here?]

FVerbaas, I wonder if it is black/white, because some individual images are "CENSORED" (/s) and some entire blogs are shut down. So there must be some sort of deeper judgement going on.

Having the initial blocking done by a bot is rude and cold, yes. The task without a bot is impossible...there are millions of images on Tumblr. So, Tumblr provides a "WTF" button by which the blog owner can initiate a review, and humans get involved directly.

What would you suggest as an alternative? Full human review of every image on every Tumblr?

operaguy posted at 3:58PM Fri, 28 December 2018 - #4342655

@EClark1894

Do you think it should be illegal for Tumblr to "control what others hear, see or think" on its private property?

I'm not into social media, anyway. For my experience, the people who use it just like to hear others pat them on the back. Hence the "Likes"]. That said, I'm a by the rules guy. If I don't like the way they treat me, I can always just leave.

@operaguy As long as there can be workable appeal to independent human judgement there would be less a problem. It would be the only available option I think. People spend time and effort on making a good upload. The publisher earns money from that uploaded content, so they are expected to do something in return. If an image is not accepted, the least one can expect is being told why it is not accepted. The site needs user content to dilute the ads with. It is the main ingredient of their product, and be prepared to pay the cost.

I am hearing that they are responding to petitions to review, for which they provide a button to the blog author. If one of your images gets blocked, you click that button and it initiates review. The review is conducted by humans. So, that system is functioning, as far as I can tell. I am not sure if Tumblr actually tells you why a specific image got blocked.

"People spend time and effort on making a good upload." Well...{humorous observation follows:} 90% of Tumblr is not content created by the author of the specific Tumblr-blogpage! Tumblr consists of reblogging of reglogged reblogged reblooged content. Probably 50% of the 90% does not even credit the page they got the content, let alone the actual creator of it. It is the land of copyright nightmare.

Touchée! Nicking was not in the discusion, was it? I had made my observations from a creator's point of view.

Thanks for that answer @FVerbass. My Tumblr account includes only my own images. Not a single link to anyone else's content except one for a petition to boycott Tumblr recently...

I'm surprised nobody pointed out the real reason for that nonsense: Tumblr's app was excluded from the Apple app store because some child pornography wasn't deleted fast enough by Tumblr. It's not the terrible mistake they made at Tumblr they care about. It's the business problem that they got excluded from Apple. And Apple seems to have a problem with nudity in general as their upcoming TV projects prove: it's supposed to be very "family friendly" in a Disney way. US family entertainment - i always wondered how there could be families if they have no sex...but I was educated in public schools without religious brainwashing.

mackis3D posted at 8:38AM Sun, 30 December 2018 - #4342713

Thanks for that answer @FVerbass. My Tumblr account includes only my own images. Not a single link to anyone else's content except one for a petition to boycott Tumblr recently...

I'm surprised nobody pointed out the real reason for that nonsense: Tumblr's app was excluded from the Apple app store because some child pornography wasn't deleted fast enough by Tumblr. It's not the terrible mistake they made at Tumblr they care about. It's the business problem that they got excluded from Apple. And Apple seems to have a problem with nudity in general as their upcoming TV projects prove: it's supposed to be very "family friendly" in a Disney way. US family entertainment - i always wondered how there could be families if they have no sex...but I was educated in public schools without religious brainwashing.

So you're saying your mom and dad, or whoever they were screwing would let you sit and watch while they had sex? Wow. Progressive.

i always wondered how there could be families if they have no sex...but I was educated in public schools without religious brainwashing.

There could be no healthy functional human digestive system without defacation either.

The public and private schools and Universities managed to explain that simple fact of human biology long before the existence of Disney or Apple inc.and their various TV projects that refuse to depict it on screen .

wolf359 posted at 3:46PM Sun, 30 December 2018 - #4342736

i always wondered how there could be families if they have no sex...but I was educated in public schools without religious brainwashing.

There could be no healthy functional human digestive system without defacation either.

The public and private schools and Universities managed to explain that simple fact of human biology long before the existence of Disney or Apple inc.and their various TV projects that refuse to depict it on screen .

There are some things that the family has to do long before you ever get to school, public, religious or otherwise. I never signed up for a "potty training" 101 in school. Didn't need to. I was edumacated in public schools too don't remember seeing any porn movies until after I graduated and could get into the local drive-in.(Yeah, we still had a few of them around back then. They're gone now though.)

EClark1894 posted at 3:12PM Sun, 30 December 2018 - #4342730

mackis3D posted at 8:38AM Sun, 30 December 2018 - #4342713

Thanks for that answer @FVerbass. My Tumblr account includes only my own images. Not a single link to anyone else's content except one for a petition to boycott Tumblr recently...

I'm surprised nobody pointed out the real reason for that nonsense: Tumblr's app was excluded from the Apple app store because some child pornography wasn't deleted fast enough by Tumblr. It's not the terrible mistake they made at Tumblr they care about. It's the business problem that they got excluded from Apple. And Apple seems to have a problem with nudity in general as their upcoming TV projects prove: it's supposed to be very "family friendly" in a Disney way. US family entertainment - i always wondered how there could be families if they have no sex...but I was educated in public schools without religious brainwashing.

So you're saying your mom and dad, or whoever they were screwing would let you sit and watch while they had sex? Wow. Progressive.

how about you READ what he wrote? he never said what you said. you invented that yourself. I think you owe the man an apology.

MagnusGreel posted at 7:05PM Sun, 30 December 2018 - #4342750

EClark1894 posted at 3:12PM Sun, 30 December 2018 - #4342730

mackis3D posted at 8:38AM Sun, 30 December 2018 - #4342713

Thanks for that answer @FVerbass. My Tumblr account includes only my own images. Not a single link to anyone else's content except one for a petition to boycott Tumblr recently...

I'm surprised nobody pointed out the real reason for that nonsense: Tumblr's app was excluded from the Apple app store because some child pornography wasn't deleted fast enough by Tumblr. It's not the terrible mistake they made at Tumblr they care about. It's the business problem that they got excluded from Apple. And Apple seems to have a problem with nudity in general as their upcoming TV projects prove: it's supposed to be very "family friendly" in a Disney way. US family entertainment - i always wondered how there could be families if they have no sex...but I was educated in public schools without religious brainwashing.

So you're saying your mom and dad, or whoever they were screwing would let you sit and watch while they had sex? Wow. Progressive.

how about you READ what he wrote? he never said what you said. you invented that yourself. I think you owe the man an apology.

I did read what he wrote. And it sounds very much like he was trying to re-interpret what "family friendly" meant. So I did too.

EClark1894 posted at 11:17PM Sun, 30 December 2018 - #4342755

MagnusGreel posted at 7:05PM Sun, 30 December 2018 - #4342750

EClark1894 posted at 3:12PM Sun, 30 December 2018 - #4342730

mackis3D posted at 8:38AM Sun, 30 December 2018 - #4342713

Thanks for that answer @FVerbass. My Tumblr account includes only my own images. Not a single link to anyone else's content except one for a petition to boycott Tumblr recently...

I'm surprised nobody pointed out the real reason for that nonsense: Tumblr's app was excluded from the Apple app store because some child pornography wasn't deleted fast enough by Tumblr. It's not the terrible mistake they made at Tumblr they care about. It's the business problem that they got excluded from Apple. And Apple seems to have a problem with nudity in general as their upcoming TV projects prove: it's supposed to be very "family friendly" in a Disney way. US family entertainment - i always wondered how there could be families if they have no sex...but I was educated in public schools without religious brainwashing.

So you're saying your mom and dad, or whoever they were screwing would let you sit and watch while they had sex? Wow. Progressive.

how about you READ what he wrote? he never said what you said. you invented that yourself. I think you owe the man an apology.

I did read what he wrote. And it sounds very much like he was trying to re-interpret what "family friendly" meant. So I did too.

Bullshit. Want to try again? The words start with "I apologise...."

MagnusGreel posted at 6:21AM Mon, 31 December 2018 - #4342760

EClark1894 posted at 11:17PM Sun, 30 December 2018 - #4342755

MagnusGreel posted at 7:05PM Sun, 30 December 2018 - #4342750

EClark1894 posted at 3:12PM Sun, 30 December 2018 - #4342730

mackis3D posted at 8:38AM Sun, 30 December 2018 - #4342713

Thanks for that answer @FVerbass. My Tumblr account includes only my own images. Not a single link to anyone else's content except one for a petition to boycott Tumblr recently...

I'm surprised nobody pointed out the real reason for that nonsense: Tumblr's app was excluded from the Apple app store because some child pornography wasn't deleted fast enough by Tumblr. It's not the terrible mistake they made at Tumblr they care about. It's the business problem that they got excluded from Apple. And Apple seems to have a problem with nudity in general as their upcoming TV projects prove: it's supposed to be very "family friendly" in a Disney way. US family entertainment - i always wondered how there could be families if they have no sex...but I was educated in public schools without religious brainwashing.

So you're saying your mom and dad, or whoever they were screwing would let you sit and watch while they had sex? Wow. Progressive.

how about you READ what he wrote? he never said what you said. you invented that yourself. I think you owe the man an apology.

I did read what he wrote. And it sounds very much like he was trying to re-interpret what "family friendly" meant. So I did too.

Bullshit. Want to try again? The words start with "I apologise...."

Yeah, well, unless you have a gun pointed at me that ain't gonna happen, so let's just agree to disagree. Happy New Year!

EClark1894 posted at 5:22PM Thu, 03 January 2019 - #4342730

So you're saying your mom and dad, or whoever they were screwing would let you sit and watch while they had sex? Wow. Progressive.

I don't know why the arrogance and needless aggressiveness this member is showing towards different members of this forum for years is tolerable to the moderators.

The topic was Tumblr and assumed censorship. Not that member's assumptions about other members. I think the rules here are very clear about it-

mackis3D posted at 12:22PM Thu, 03 January 2019 - #4343024

EClark1894 posted at 5:22PM Thu, 03 January 2019 - #4342730

So you're saying your mom and dad, or whoever they were screwing would let you sit and watch while they had sex? Wow. Progressive.

---

I don't know why the arrogance and needless aggressiveness this member is showing towards different members of this forum for years is tolerable to the moderators.

The topic was Tumblr and assumed censorship. Not that member's assumptions about other members. I think the rules here are very clear about it-

Honestly, I thought I was being very restrained in my response, particularly that crack about "US family entertainment - i always wondered how there could be families if they have no sex...but I was educated in public schools without religious brainwashing."

I happen to be a US citizen, very proud of that fact, thank you, and I don't consider my religion to be "brainwashing". And I'm never going to apologize for defending either of those points. So as I offered before, let's just agree to disagree.

randym77 posted at 4:25PM Mon, 07 January 2019 - #4342518

Basically, it comes down to money. Tumblr was hemorrhaging money.

And now they're hemorrhaging users, as many have left the platform as a matter of principle even when they have not been directly affected. So what has Tumblr really accomplished beyond killing their site. Same with Patreon and their selective application of their own tos, which is now costing them hundreds of thousands of patrons.

And really, when these social media platforms receive hundreds of millions of dollars from the federal government for operating and "research" funds, they can no longer legitimately be considered a private entity. Definitely not the same as a truly private entity that operates solely on the revenue it generates on its own. And yet, those truly private businesses are subject to more laws and regulations regarding who they're allowed to deny their services to than these so-called privately owned social media platforms are.

Get used to censor-by-algorithm, folks... (by way of comparison, I'm in Facebook jail on a 30-day stint because the claimed one of my renders was a nudie pic. Prolly why I keep an account on MeWe as well, where even outright nudie pics are perfectly ignored (not that I'm in a mood to generate any, but if I were so inclined, they wouldn't care.)

Anyrate, yeah - with a site big enough to get millions of new images a day, algorithms are pretty much the only way they can patrol for stuff deemed 'offensive' in their TOS. Me, I'm easy about it - like OP, if they start cutting into my enjoyment of a site, I pull the D-ring and bail on it.

PS: Pretty sure my childhood self would've been grossed out by the sight of my parents doing the linen fandango... shudder ;)

My suggestion for any future pics would be to avoid beige/flesh-colored dresses. Even with developing AI, algorithms tend to suck for identifying what needs to go and what can stay...

Obviously I'm way behind the times. I thought images were being flagged because of keyword descriptors. But you're saying there is software that is, in effect, "looking" at the image data itself? To use a silly example...

If, circle surrounded by circle, surrounded by circle, analyze colors.

If color of t inner circle is black and color of outer circle is white, color of middle circle is irrelevant. "Collection" is an eye. Skip to end.

If color of both inner and middle circle is pink and color of outer circle is beige, then "collection" is a bare breast. Flag for "violation".

End routine.

I didn't think we had reached that level of pattern recognition.

Sincerely,

Bill

Redfern posted at 1:35PM Mon, 21 January 2019 - #4343958

Obviously I'm way behind the times. I thought images were being flagged because of keyword descriptors. But you're saying there is software that is, in effect, "looking" at the image data itself? To use a silly example...

If, circle surrounded by circle, surrounded by circle, analyze colors. [...]

It's reached that level and then some. Go to tineye.com, or Google Image Search, and it sometime gets almost scary as to pattern recognition.

Problem is, it's not perfect, so occasionally it flags stuff that it shouldn't, but allows stuff that it shouldn't, if that makes sense.

One would hope that such algorithms were smart enough to take 'gray area' stuff and flag it for a human to eyeball and decide, but that would require someone's time and company money, so it all too often does not.

AmbientShade posted at 7:46AM Wed, 23 January 2019 - #4343266

randym77 posted at 4:25PM Mon, 07 January 2019 - #4342518

Basically, it comes down to money. Tumblr was hemorrhaging money.

And now they're hemorrhaging users, as many have left the platform as a matter of principle even when they have not been directly affected. So what has Tumblr really accomplished beyond killing their site. Same with Patreon and their selective application of their own tos, which is now costing them hundreds of thousands of patrons.

And really, when these social media platforms receive hundreds of millions of dollars from the federal government for operating and "research" funds, they can no longer legitimately be considered a private entity. Definitely not the same as a truly private entity that operates solely on the revenue it generates on its own. And yet, those truly private businesses are subject to more laws and regulations regarding who they're allowed to deny their services to than these so-called privately owned social media platforms are.

Dunno if Yahoo/Verizon/Tumblr gets hundreds of millions from the federal government these days. They're the minor leagues compared to Facebook and Google.

Tumblr may not survive, but if it didn't make money, it wasn't going to survive anyway. Like so many others. I've been thinking about all the content that has been lost over the years. The message boards at CompuServe, AOL, Prodigy, GEnie. Personal web sites at AOL, Geocities, FortuneCity, Simplenet, Tripod. Mailing lists at eGroups and Onelist and Yahoogroups. (Yahoogroups survived, but nuked almost all the archives.) The Usenet archives at DejaNews, Remarq, and others. (Google bought out DejaNews, IIRC, but the archives are not complete.) Someone compared it to a digital burning of the library of Alexandria.

It's really amazing that Renderosity has persisted as long as it has. So many other Poser sites are gone.

I'm still on Tumblr, and the censor bots do seem to be getting better. Fewer "false flags." They tell you now if a post of yours gets flagged, and there's a special section on the menu where you can look for flagged posts if you miss the notice.

But there are still issues with the system, particularly with re-blogs. If someone re-blogs your post, and their re-blog gets flagged, you are not notified, though your original post is hidden, too. You won't see it even if you check the "review flagged posts" section on the sidebar. You have to hope the person who re-blogged you asks for a review. If they don't, you probably won't even know. If you find out, you can ask from a review of your original post, but that means scrolling through all your old posts (which may be hundreds or thousands) to find the one that's hidden.

It's even worse if you re-blog something and the original post gets flagged. If the author of the original post doesn't ask for a review, your re-blog remains forever hidden. This happens fairly often, because the original poster may have left Tumblr, deactivated their account, or just doesn't use Tumblr very much.