MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: So they do use AI to review then...  (Read 3660 times)

3 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.



« Reply #1 on: July 31, 2020, 05:27 »
+1
We all knew that.

« Reply #2 on: July 31, 2020, 05:46 »
+6
We all knew that.

We knew but SS always said NO

Shame on SS that they took this decision, many quality work got destroyed due to this stupid AI tool.

« Reply #3 on: July 31, 2020, 06:23 »
+3
I used to resubmit everything before the 0.10. A lot of wasted time.



« Reply #4 on: July 31, 2020, 06:25 »
+6
So now we all can see they are liars (we kinda knew anyway). Should you trust your work to them? I said no, and deleted my port. #boycottShutterstock #shutterstockBoycott

« Reply #5 on: July 31, 2020, 06:37 »
+4
If there is so much cost cutting, it is sure that this business is unstable and unsustainable even for big giants.

« Reply #6 on: July 31, 2020, 06:55 »
+2
The highlighted text is a charming euphemism for making reviewers ie actual people (in the US and overseas) redundant and using 'robots' instead. SP is the master of obfuscation. Sstock is such a caring company. Not.

« Reply #7 on: July 31, 2020, 07:07 »
+7
Over the years, I worked for 2 or 3 companies that ended up in trouble. You start to recognize the signs. They get rid of the bottled water cooler, no more free popcorn in the employees lounge, etc. Layoffs.  Then on payday everyone rushes to the bank to cash their checks before the money runs out. The final straw is when you get to work in the morning, and the doors are locked because rent hasnt been paid for months. And yet top management still lives the life of luxury. Sigh.  :( I generally dont wish ill will on people, but I really hope this happens to SS. Except the only ones who will pay are the honest-working employees. Oringer et al have squirreled away their billions, so what do they care.

Snow

« Reply #8 on: July 31, 2020, 07:19 »
+1
We all knew that.

Since when?

Does this explain all the stolen images and similars (spamfolio's with almost exact copies) that got in while some of us get tight reviews with rejection for similar even if it's a totally different angle or concept? Not to mention all the other ridiculous rejections?
So that would mean some get a free pass (no reviews) while others get the bots?

I think if it was AI they would scan the library for exact copies (or flipped horizontally/vertically) and reject, all in a matter of seconds, no?

Again this only makes sense to me if some would get a free pass while others get AI reviews and after complaining human reviews.


« Reply #9 on: July 31, 2020, 08:04 »
+3
We all knew that.

Since when?



Since all my 50 images were reviewed in 1 second with the same program that they use on BS.

« Reply #10 on: July 31, 2020, 08:14 »
+2
We all knew that.

Since when?

Does this explain all the stolen images and similars (spamfolio's with almost exact copies) that got in while some of us get tight reviews with rejection for similar even if it's a totally different angle or concept? Not to mention all the other ridiculous rejections?
So that would mean some get a free pass (no reviews) while others get the bots?

I think if it was AI they would scan the library for exact copies (or flipped horizontally/vertically) and reject, all in a matter of seconds, no?

Again this only makes sense to me if some would get a free pass while others get AI reviews and after complaining human reviews.

It's been known because they buried that language into their (I believe) SEC filing.  I myself have found it multiple times and it is probably buried in the MSG threads somewhere.  Calling them out back then, they denied it.  Now it turns out to be true after all. So they did, in fact, lie to us all along. Since when? I think it was around 2012 or 2013 or thereabouts.  When images that were perfectly sharp, professional prepared and rejected for being out of focus, that started raising red flags.  And that is about the time we dug into their reporting to find the phrase automated inspection, or something like that.
« Last Edit: July 31, 2020, 08:24 by Mantis »

« Reply #11 on: July 31, 2020, 08:26 »
+1
Or they could have AI review to ingest new, but a human reviews everything that passed, nobody looks at the fails. AI can't review photos, we know that, they know that. Maybe finding similar or focus, lighting and some other, but there's no AI that can review a photo.

Shelma1

« Reply #12 on: July 31, 2020, 08:39 »
+5
They used AI, plus they got hit with a class action lawsuit from their human reviewers for allegedly not following U.S. employment law. So the solution for that was to get rid of the pesky humans altogether.

« Reply #13 on: July 31, 2020, 09:58 »
+6
... but there's no AI that can review a photo.

Sure there is - if you don't care about what ends up in the collection.

Have you seen the badly lit garbage they've been accepting over the last couple of months?

It should be an embarrassment to any agency to show that type of work, but Shutterstock is happily doing that. In the illustration department, there's misspelled garbage and endlessly repetitive flag combinations or simple patterns

I've been tweeting about this for weeks. Some examples:

https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/1288187977311481856
https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/1288153643045158915
https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/1287887730462973952
https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/1286739227300880384
https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/1284252477575979010
https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/1288683434852798464

There are many more examples (@joannsnover and #BoycottShutterstock) but you get the idea

m

« Reply #14 on: July 31, 2020, 12:01 »
0
All the agencies will never get AI to work completely to review. Too many edge cases. One mistake with the wrong trademark or restriction and all cost save will be wiped out.

« Reply #15 on: July 31, 2020, 12:19 »
+1

I've been tweeting about this for weeks. Some examples:

https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/1288187977311481856
https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/1288153643045158915
https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/1287887730462973952
https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/1286739227300880384
https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/1284252477575979010
https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/1288683434852798464

There are many more examples (@joannsnover and #BoycottShutterstock) but you get the idea

Jo Ann, those examples are absolutely wonderful! Every last one.

That said I especially enjoyed reading these two, in all of their variations:

NO ONE IS FRIEND IN THIS WORLD BROO EVERYONE IS LIER

Happy Independenec Day


It was fun to contemplate exactly what sort of savvy buyer out there in Shitterstock Land would jump at the chance to feature one of those botched-English graphics in their advertisement.


csm

« Reply #16 on: July 31, 2020, 13:59 »
0
... but there's no AI that can review a photo.

Sure there is - if you don't care about what ends up in the collection.

Have you seen the badly lit garbage they've been accepting over the last couple of months?

It should be an embarrassment to any agency to show that type of work, but Shutterstock is happily doing that. In the illustration department, there's misspelled garbage and endlessly repetitive flag combinations or simple patterns

I've been tweeting about this for weeks. Some examples:

https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/1288187977311481856
https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/1288153643045158915
https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/1287887730462973952
https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/1286739227300880384
https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/1284252477575979010
https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/1288683434852798464

There are many more examples (@joannsnover and #BoycottShutterstock) but you get the idea

Keep them coming, it would be funny if it wasn't`t so sad.
Perhaps the spelling mistakes are from someone having a laugh with the AI :)
Do they actually look at new would do you think at the office? Or do they not care?
I really cannot see how they can proud of accepting this work just so that they can say the numbers are going up.

Few other agents show how big their portfolios are and I don't really care.
Its only SS and Alamy that make a big thing of it.


« Reply #17 on: July 31, 2020, 14:42 »
+1
The examiners reviewed in a second, because they had covered the number of possible approvals. If it is a software that it was examining, it simply said rejected in a second, because being able to obtain more than two and a half million files a week, so as not to pay more personnel for image placement and search, they decided that they did not approve more than a million two hundred thousand images a week.

It seems, according to his ambiguous words, that they have a software to eliminate human work. Of Artificial Intelligence nothing. I just know that your software department is not capable of code lines to automatically convert a vector to a visibly acceptable thumbnail, if the user does not upload a huge vector image. Conclusion, AI, nothing at all. A software drill that randomly passes and rejects almost everything.


All the AI ​​related to language learning has been a failure, it has not even been possible to adapt the languages ​​to another language. Less with pictures. From AI, nothing. There are images with text in languages ​​other than English, from AI nothing at all. Not.

As I read, it is a farewell, an obituary. We have earned money because we have reduced the percentage for contributors. Do not expect earnings of this size in the next quarterly analyzes, we work for the long term. Therefore, the translation is, we have earned money because you hired me. I am a great CEO. Now that the CEO has shown that he is someone of value to the company, he can live in the company until its final closure. Its decline is imminent. SS does not exist.

As for AS, now that it is the undisputed King, I hope that the agency looks for clients beyond the cloud and its software, it must look for clients in any corner of the world, those clients who do not know how to work on image editing, but need files. They will, because money is the soul of companies and AS is not a business novice.


Public dismissal of a company that was the most profitable and that its mismanagement withdrew it from the market. Example of death from poorly managed success.

« Reply #18 on: July 31, 2020, 16:22 »
+3
I would suspect AI initially screens the photos and sends a recommendation to reviewers to inspect.
Then the outsourced call centre style reviewers are supposed to sanity check it and decide on yes/no but most just accept the AI recommendations without bothering to check the image.

That or a certain percentage goes to human, a percentage stays as AI only.

Its certainly a total lottery since 202 began, perfectly possible to get 100 out of 100 images or clips with 5 different cameras an 10 different environments all rejected at once, usually for one reason and every single one gets accepted when resubmitted 20 seconds later etc.
The review process does no quality control at all.

« Reply #19 on: July 31, 2020, 16:37 »
+1
..
It seems, according to his ambiguous words, that they have a software to eliminate human work. Of Artificial Intelligence nothing. I just know that your software department is not capable of code lines to automatically convert a vector to a visibly acceptable thumbnail, if the user does not upload a huge vector image. Conclusion, AI, nothing at all. A software drill that randomly passes and rejects almost everything.
again w silly claims - how do you know what their IT dept can do -- and citing one case does not prove your claim AI doesnt exist -- have you ever actually studied computer science or AI or read any of the many books on it? I have for over 40 years and seen dramatic improvements over that time. i've published articles in 'Computer Language' and 'AI Expert' magazines and used AI for npc in multi player online games, inlcuding one that played bridge

Quote
All the AI ​​related to language learning has been a failure, it has not even been possible to adapt the languages ​​to another language. Less with pictures. From AI, nothing. There are images with text in languages ​​other than English, from AI nothing at all. Not.
more nonsense - alexa, siri, google don't have people answering questions in natural languages. Translation programs do an excellent job in many fields and are constantly improving.  AI is part of every automobile, ATC. What do think the word autopilot means?

you seem to define AI only if it passes the turing test
 

« Reply #20 on: July 31, 2020, 17:17 »
0
you seem to define AI only if it passes the turing test

Sadly i know quite a few *people* that wouldn't pass the Turing test...

« Reply #21 on: July 31, 2020, 17:53 »
0

        ...... @ cascoly



I love your Italian character. A little too challenging for my body. Maybe with age, you are becoming too much of a warrior.

I need your friendship, I need you by my side. I appreciate you and you make me smile.

We gain nothing from this confrontation that leads us nowhere. We are all anonymous. I retired from all wars for a long time.


Your knowledge, on these subjects, I recognize it. AI exists in many fields. Very specific sectors, where the software learns behaviors.

AI is operational today in countless fields and diverse sectors. For concrete things.

SS, you and the Vatican Pope can defend that SS has AI. I tell you that they may have a certain expired software substitute for something specific. Far from AI to impersonate a human in deciding what is salable or not in microstock.

As for its CEO, his subconscious betrays him, when he talks about fresh product for his subscribers, what he means is that he lacks fresh material from many collaborators, but that he feels with the authority to sell what SS decides to customers sell at all times. It does not value its collaborators and it does not value its customers.

Obviously, the CEO knows that his problem is the fresh material that is already leaking to SS today. The clients are very comfortable and they are where everyone is. The day they discover that everyone is in AS, the clients will be in AS.

Returning to the subject of AI, I don't need to be very smart, there is currently no OCR to recognize twisted 3D text, with perspective, or a drawing, inserted instead of a letter in the same word. No power of decision to detect the offensive meaning in a sentence. Image exam AI for the sales decision at microstock is an unattainable dream for humans, today, and for several decades. That AI would have more value than all the internet together plus NASA.

SS does not fool me. They do not want images, the agency believes that it can sell fridges at the north pole. In short, when making the decision to pay 0.10 they know that it is the only thing that generates an extra income for the moment. For now, tomorrow will be another day.


Friend, at least, we agree on the political vision, we see the same in Trump.

« Reply #22 on: July 31, 2020, 18:32 »
0
By the way, if they have AI capable of detecting hate speech, Google or Twitter would buy it if they had money to pay for it, as well as the EU to manage the internet, fake news and article 13.
The day a machine decides whether an unfocused photo is commercially powerful, on that day, humanity will have made an extraordinary breakthrough. More than the one that comes close with 5g, quantum computing. The machines cannot interpret a giraffe-shaped ashtray, no matter how much ego SS has.

« Reply #23 on: July 31, 2020, 19:12 »
0
We all knew that.

We didn't knew that, we just strongly suspected about that.

« Reply #24 on: July 31, 2020, 20:31 »
0
There is something we all agree on. If they have acquired a code to save the examiners, and they call it AI, we are all on the same page and paragraph, the closest thing to Intelligence is a jellyfish.

A random approval and rejection algorithm, a Michigan trucker, an Israel Security Guard, a Las Vegas restaurant chef would do better. His reviews lack common sense. Something that characterizes this Agency, total absence of common sense.


They boast of Intelligence in something that is not real, and they do not have an understanding or the concept of Intelligence. Neither real nor virtual.

Paying 0.10 for my files does not give me confidence that they know the concept Intelligence.

I do not know the level of the reviews at present, nor am I interested. SS does not exist.

They were successful in the past because of something very criticized, and that I value very much, they had everything. Whatever a user was looking for, SS had it. Not anymore, not today. Having all the files gave him value.

The SS decided that of the 1,200,000 images a week, they only made relevant 5k each month. They had a million one hundred and ninety-five images a month, even rejecting 2 million images. It gives them exactly the same, if those images are of quality or not. SS is convinced that they have the power to decide what the customer buys.

SS has no common sense. It is believed that you can do what you want, when you want and how you want. And they are wrong. SS does not exist.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
5 Replies
4642 Views
Last post October 20, 2006, 10:23
by CJPhoto
2 Replies
1686 Views
Last post May 07, 2012, 18:06
by heywoody
5 Replies
2593 Views
Last post October 10, 2012, 17:24
by tab62
Pond 5 review changes

Started by stephenkirsh « 1 2 ... 8 9 » Pond5

210 Replies
38448 Views
Last post May 14, 2016, 18:20
by PigsInSpace
2 Replies
2393 Views
Last post September 14, 2017, 02:27
by Dodie

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle