homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.237.125.89
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Pubcon Platinum Sponsor 2014
Home / Forums Index / Google / Google SEO News and Discussion
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: Robert Charlton & aakk9999 & brotherhood of lan & goodroi

Google SEO News and Discussion Forum

This 51 message thread spans 2 pages: 51 ( [1] 2 > >     
New Google image labeler
Look what google is up to...
netchicken1




msg:3069178
 7:38 pm on Sep 1, 2006 (gmt 0)

Using people to label images. [images.google.com...]

How does it work?
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.

<edit reason: limit on length of quotes.
See Terms of Service [webmasterworld.com]

[edited by: tedster at 8:01 pm (utc) on Sep. 1, 2006]

 

JeremyL




msg:3069285
 8:37 pm on Sep 1, 2006 (gmt 0)

Very interesting. Google didn't just create this for fun, so what are they trying to learn? If they have enough people play the game, I am guessing the data can be used to help determine the quality of the image search algo.

mattg3




msg:3069342
 9:39 pm on Sep 1, 2006 (gmt 0)

Hey Google is giving up in public and admit their algorithms don't work and only people can do it. :)

Turing wins again .. or something to that effect ..

Interesting way of trying to build a lie detector ... wonder if that would be admissable in court. Theory .. two random people that meet do not lie if they describe the picture with same name.

thetrasher




msg:3069361
 10:07 pm on Sep 1, 2006 (gmt 0)

If you label each photo of a man with "man", each photo of a woman "woman" and each photo of a bridge "bridge" it's not that useful.

jomaxx




msg:3069453
 11:38 pm on Sep 1, 2006 (gmt 0)

OMG an online game that can be used to build a database of information. Does anyone else see how brilliant this is?

I'm not sure I love this specific application of the idea, as I'm not a big fan of searching for images by labelling them in this fashion. But still.

Leosghost




msg:3069470
 11:53 pm on Sep 1, 2006 (gmt 0)

lowest common denominator = quality search?

jbinbpt




msg:3069474
 11:58 pm on Sep 1, 2006 (gmt 0)

Perhaps they are testing the quality of various thumbnail formats. The images are pretty bad.

Bewenched




msg:3069517
 1:42 am on Sep 2, 2006 (gmt 0)

That was fun when you actually had someone with a few brain cells to play with. Kinda like playing Pyramid...

SEOtop10




msg:3069575
 3:31 am on Sep 2, 2006 (gmt 0)

I just played it and it quickly becomes addictive. Great way to exercise the brain - the kind of lateral thinking that humans can do can't be matched.

No, you can't label a man a man because you have to match against an unknown partner, who might not be trying to game the system. And what do you gain even if you could?

whoisgregg




msg:3070057
 6:32 pm on Sep 2, 2006 (gmt 0)

If you label each photo of a man with "man", each photo of a woman "woman" and each photo of a bridge "bridge" it's not that useful.

It's very useful if someone later wants to search for images of a "man," a "woman," or a "bridge." The current method of keywording images is by inferring the image's content based on surrounding text.

The "off-limits" words are ones that have been chosen over and over again. So, the most common words will stop counting for points as time goes by, forcing the players to choose more specific keywords.

I actually hope Google offers this as a business service to companies with image collections that need to be keyworded.

goubarev




msg:3070193
 10:18 pm on Sep 2, 2006 (gmt 0)

I would very interesting to me (and some people in India ;c) - if google would actually be paying me for doing this...
It seems at the rate I'm going - $0.10 for 100 points would be fair...

mattg3




msg:3070274
 2:26 am on Sep 3, 2006 (gmt 0)

google would actually be paying me

Nah capitalism works by getting the lowest available price and sadly somewhere on this planet there will always be someone doing it for free.

bird




msg:3070421
 9:45 am on Sep 3, 2006 (gmt 0)

Hey Google is giving up in public and admit their algorithms don't work and only people can do it.

When and where did Google claim to have algorithms that reliably identify image content?

mattg3




msg:3070662
 6:20 pm on Sep 3, 2006 (gmt 0)

[webmasterworld.com...]

In normal search too .. :) Editorial content .. DMOZ Mark 2 ..

pontifex




msg:3071228
 1:22 pm on Sep 4, 2006 (gmt 0)

two people are shown a website in a frame below an input field. they both must type in keywords to describe the page. if both keywords matches, it proves that both people work for the same SEO company and they want to stuff more keywords to their URLs :-)

my 2 pennies,
P!

isorg




msg:3071235
 1:38 pm on Sep 4, 2006 (gmt 0)

Is the "partner" actually there...?

longen




msg:3071244
 1:52 pm on Sep 4, 2006 (gmt 0)

Time to get your META tags correct!

Harry




msg:3071246
 1:57 pm on Sep 4, 2006 (gmt 0)

A rose is a rose. Some of the other players are complete idiots! How can you not call a rose, by its name?

mcavic




msg:3071270
 2:25 pm on Sep 4, 2006 (gmt 0)

I just tried a round. It was suprisingly fun and productive. My partner and I agreed on: logo, people, map, chart, galaxy, table, and office. He/she didn't recognize a model of Deep Space Nine.

TravelSite




msg:3071278
 2:48 pm on Sep 4, 2006 (gmt 0)

Great - I really enjoyed that :)

I'm easily amused!

There should be more images to do though in a single game.
...and most of the images are too small for me to see clearly on my 12inch/1400x1050 tablet.

I assume that this is to get humans to correctly label things for the Google Images search - a brillant idea :)

mcavic




msg:3071285
 2:58 pm on Sep 4, 2006 (gmt 0)

most of the images are too small for me to see clearly

Me too, with a 19 inch screen.

esllou




msg:3071286
 2:59 pm on Sep 4, 2006 (gmt 0)

maybe they're just testing the technology until releasing to great fanfare their "Rate-A-Site" game with three smilies (frown, neutral, smile) to choose from for each site.

securetron




msg:3071295
 3:10 pm on Sep 4, 2006 (gmt 0)

Tagging Game... It's looks like Google starts categorization of image objects using hand made tags. But tags does not usually chosen as part of some formally defined classification scheme. Gmail was one of the first to allow categorization of objects using tags... New intervention?

weeks




msg:3071320
 3:27 pm on Sep 4, 2006 (gmt 0)

This is a noble effort by G. In the 1980s I attempted to set up a photo file for a major corporation's PR department. It was a mess. Lots and lots of work with little payback.

Note: People will swear that they can tell the difference between a sunset and a sunrise in a picture. But, you can't. It's a classic example of why using un-expert observations to make a case is unwise.

lexipixel




msg:3071330
 3:35 pm on Sep 4, 2006 (gmt 0)


two people are shown a website in a frame below an input field. they both must type in keywords to describe the page. if both keywords matches, it proves that both people work for the same SEO company and they want to stuff more keywords to their URLs :-)
- pontifex

Exellent suggestion on how to game it. People in India, Russia and the U.S. mid-west must be BS. Google figured out how to get quality control and data entry done for less than anybody would do it, (for free).

Unfortunately, people will play the game, and eventually only images that meet this 50/50 id test and have matching surrounding page content and/or alt tags will rank well.

I wonder if "get people to work for free" fits with the "Do no evil" mantra?

SilverLining




msg:3071337
 3:44 pm on Sep 4, 2006 (gmt 0)

Possibly also to do with the image recognition for the new Picasa...

lexipixel




msg:3071345
 3:50 pm on Sep 4, 2006 (gmt 0)

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.

-Google's "thank you" at end of game

Time to call legal:

1. Google showed my 10 year old porn, a nazi atrocity photo, and one of a republican senator knocking down an old lady to get into a cab ahead of her --- now I have to send her to therapy --- I want to sue!

2. Google showed one of my site's images to get this "contribution" from a third party, I want to sue.

3. Google is accepting contributions and not decalring it is as "unearned income" on their tax returns.

Seriously though, it's a brilliant way to get people to do Google's homework for them for free. Who said Sergey, Brin and Vinton were idiots?

httpwebwitch




msg:3071346
 3:57 pm on Sep 4, 2006 (gmt 0)

fun.

This isn't a new idea, others have done this to create captcha crackers... there was a thread here about something similar a few months ago

MamaDawg




msg:3071495
 6:15 pm on Sep 4, 2006 (gmt 0)

Very addictive, whatever the ulterior motive is ...

esllou




msg:3071575
 7:47 pm on Sep 4, 2006 (gmt 0)

I just got 1000 with "guest". How can pairs get 3000 which is listed as the best of the day? 30 matches?

This 51 message thread spans 2 pages: 51 ( [1] 2 > >
Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / Google / Google SEO News and Discussion
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Home ¦ Free Tools ¦ Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About ¦ Library ¦ Newsletter
WebmasterWorld is a Developer Shed Community owned by Jim Boykin.
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved