[HN Gopher] Does Someone Know My Name? ___________________________________________________________________ Does Someone Know My Name? Author : Tomte Score : 216 points Date : 2022-09-26 15:20 UTC (7 hours ago) (HTM) web link (blogs.loc.gov) (TXT) w3m dump (blogs.loc.gov) | Semaphor wrote: | I found the stories of the solved pictures in 2018 to be a great | read: https://blogs.loc.gov/now-see-hear/2018/05/hard-won- | victorie... | betwixthewires wrote: | I can say definitively that the last photo is of 2 women. They're | both female. To mee it's plainly obvious, just look closely at | them, they're women. That should help narrow it down quite a bit, | after reading the article about that photo they said they can't | figure that out. | exabrial wrote: | If they could provide a bit higher resolution scans that would | help out tremendously | akiselev wrote: | When I saw that this was from the LoC I really hoped to see some | photography from the Prokudin-Gorskii collection [1] but this | seems to be mostly "iconic" photos from Western media. I'd be a | lot more interested to know who the two cossacks were [2] and | what they thought about at the dawn of the first world war or | literally anything about the shepherd's boy that randomly stopped | for a photograph in 1910 [3], not knowing he'd be immortalized as | the first shepherd caught on a color camera. | | The whole collection consists of thousands of (mostly) full color | photographs of Russia taken on color plates between 1905 and 1915 | by a single man and its well worth a look. When the plates align | perfectly, the detail in the photographs is nothing short of | stunning | | [1] http://www.loc.gov/pictures/search/?st=grid&co=prok | | [2] https://www.loc.gov/pictures/resource/ppmsc.03940/?co=prok | | [3] https://www.loc.gov/pictures/resource/ppem.01541/?co=prok | bombcar wrote: | I wonder if you could attack this from another angle. | | Let's assume we can narrow down a photo to "probably somewhere | near LA because movies" - then if we can roughly estimate the age | of the person, and when it was taken, we should be able to | determine the current age of the contemporaries, or current age | of the youngest person at the time of the photo who would | recognize them. | | So if the photo was taken in the 1960s, and the youngest person | "on set" would have been 20 at the time, they would now be around | 80. | | So where would LA 80 year olds be who might recognize the photo? | Put it in front of them (grocery stores posters? HAVE YOU SEEN | THIS MAN banners at nursing homes?) | jrussino wrote: | If shown out of context, I would totally believe that #16 was | generated by one of the recently-popular text-to-image AIs. | | "Baby C-3PO in the fetal position, floating in outer space, | wearing Beats By Dre headphones. Retro-futurism. Black and white | photograph" | jcims wrote: | Some attempts, started with your prompt then started chasing | the theme. Image generation process in the captions. Stable | Diffusion and DALL-E did the best in general (the uploaded | examples cheated by going two stage, do the starfield first | then erase the middle and infill). Midjourney thinks of stars | like you're drawing a children's book: | | https://imgur.com/a/pO6JFWH | | Makes me think AI image golf would be fun. Start with an image, | then see who can get to something approximating the finished | image with minimum prompts. Nearly impossible to accurately | score but it's a fun process. | mxuribe wrote: | > ...AI image golf would be fun. Start with an image, then | see who can get to something approximating the finished image | with minimum prompts.... | | That would be such a fun game indeed!!! | aasasd wrote: | I'm gonna bet that the pic is an interpretation of an image | from '2001 Space Odyssey'. Basically that child plus Sorayama. | [deleted] | bombcar wrote: | For asking for help identifying the people, those are very small | resolution images. | RicoElectrico wrote: | You can remove resolution from the image URLs to get a slightly | better version. | | However you're right. People hosting this blog clearly are | still in the dial-up era. | | But then again, archival/historical institutions do this all | the time for some reason, that is not providing original scans. | tablespoon wrote: | > You can remove resolution from the image URLs to get a | slightly better version. | | > However you're right. People hosting this blog clearly are | still in the dial-up era. | | Or do they just have their blog software misconfigured? I | have a feeling the scaling is being done automatically. | ztgasdf wrote: | I wouldn't say a resolution from 300x244[0] to 3023x2456[1] | is "slightly better." All things considered, it's pretty | standard to use thumbnails in an article, but it definitely | would be nice if they made the thumbnails directly link to | the original resolution image. | | [0] - https://blogs.loc.gov/now-see- | hear/files/2021/11/48-300x244.... | | [1] - https://blogs.loc.gov/now-see-hear/files/2021/11/48.jpg | bombcar wrote: | Very nice! You can clearly see something like "Sesostris | Temple" on the background award thing and maybe "Honorary | Big Brother?" Honorary Elk Member"? | | That may be an angle for tracking it down, the man seems to | be behind "his desk" which would mean the award applies to | him. | UmYeahNo wrote: | Trying to decode the letter on the desk... The resolution | is such that it's all guesswork, but it's clearly a "Memo | to Records" or Recorders[0] which I think of as something | for a "permanent record". Gov't records, medical records, | etc. | | And possibly the image of the person on the letterhead is | the signer. So, his company? Gov't Position? Law/Medical | Practice? I'm bad at this. | | [0] https://imgur.com/a/YBFmPTL | jacobyoder wrote: | https://www.sesostrisshrine.org/ looks like Nebraska | area? Perhaps someone at that group might have some idea | who he is. | | Just finding out who made the scary tie-pin might be | enough to identify this person! | sowbug wrote: | Looks like "Honorary Life Member" if my squinting is | working. | elwell wrote: | The caption in the blog says this: | | We've been all across the country and back trying to ID | this man at his desk. Yes, that's a Shriner's certificate | on the wall behind him. It was issued from the Sesostris | Shrine located in Lincoln, NE. And his stationary says | "Memo to Recorders." The folks at the Lincoln Shrine have | been very helpful to us be we still have not yet been | able to ID this man. | chriscjcj wrote: | Interesting how around his right ear and along the top of | his head it looks like his picture was cut out at some | point. | dn3500 wrote: | I don't think that's cut & paste, I think it's dodge & | burn. It's something you do while printing a negative | that emphasizes the subject, in this case the man, and | de-emphasizes the background. I was a news photographer | in the 1970s and we did this all the time. | datalopers wrote: | > clearly are still in the dial-up era | | Modern web devs should be required to spend a weekend with | 56Kbps just to experience how terribly bloated the web is | today. | KMnO4 wrote: | Meta did this on Tuesdays: | | https://www.theverge.com/2015/10/28/9625062/facebook-2g-tue | s... | adolph wrote: | If one were to transport these modern web devs to the time | of 56Kbs they'd find things were just as bloated given the | capacities of the time. The only question is what novel use | of <blink> they'd find. | | As example, here is A List Apart in 1999 "CODE: Broadband, | schmoadband. In the real world, we must trick our pages | into loading faster." | | https://web.archive.org/web/19981212012511/http://alistapar | t... | dylan604 wrote: | A List Apart is one of those sites that just impresses me | with their content. I'm not a UI guy, and from time to | time have to remember how to do something I had done | somewhere else usually something to do with CSS. There's | a specific example on Taming Lists from them that I refer | to any time I'm trying to do inline lists that makes them | play/feel nice other than display:inline. | | If I'm ever searching for a CSS something and receive A | List Apart link, it gets clicked | RicoElectrico wrote: | Yes, _but_... the best practice today is lazy-loaded | thumbnails linking to the real deal. Or opening a lightbox | with a 800-1000px or so image and a full-sized download | link below it. | CommieBobDole wrote: | Very slightly related: One of the most satisfying interactions | with a public organization I've ever had was finding an image in | the LoC collection of Shasta Dam misidentified as Fontana Dam in | North Carolina. A reverse image search revealed that it had | apparently been that way for years, and was used in all sorts of | contexts by third parties as a picture of Fontana Dam, despite | the presence of a 14,000 foot snow-capped volcano in the | background, a geographic feature which is notably absent from | North Carolina. | | I emailed the contact address, and not only did they respond | promptly, they corrected the listing and added a note about the | previous misidentification and emailed me to let me know that it | had been corrected. | | https://www.loc.gov/item/2011630316/ | woodruffw wrote: | The National Archives is equally incredible and responsive: I | made a Twitter bot[1] to automatically post photos from the | DOCUMERICA project[2], and found handful of missing scans (just | a few dozen in over 10,000) in the process. | | I emailed them to ask about it, and they responded in a handful | of days[3]. | | [1]: https://twitter.com/dailydocumerica | | [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Documerica | | [3]: https://blog.yossarian.net/2021/10/25/A-small-documerica- | twi... | lelandfe wrote: | I emailed the National Archives about the nature of a quote | from an HN comment ages ago. I spent a lot of time digging | for sources and got stuck at a "box" somewhere in the | Archives. | | I emailed the Archives and was politely informed that I would | need to visit in person to ascertain the exact document. | | A few days later an Archives staffer emailed me under | secrecy, saying they were not allowed to be doing this, but | then provided exact details for what I needed. | | It was truly an excellent internet moment for me. Sometimes | the government is cool! | sh34r wrote: | So much of the government relies on staffers discreetly | working around the kafkaesque bureaucracy, and everyone | involved turning a blind eye and respecting their need for | discretion. | redtexture wrote: | A story with further details desirable. | lelandfe wrote: | Trying to honor the unnamed Archives person's request for | anonymity :) you can find it in my comment history if you | search back far enough | js2 wrote: | I've been to both these dams. Searching DDG for "Fontana Dam" | still brings up a bunch of pictures of Shasta Dam. I wonder how | long the correction will take (if ever?) to work its way | through the Internet? How long ago did LoC make the correction? | dhosek wrote: | I found a similar misidentification (although with less spread | of a photo which claimed to be Graham Greene but was some | unknown individual: | | https://www.dahosek.com/ceci-nest-pas-graham-greene/ | aagd wrote: | https://elpais.com/cultura/2019/10/06/actualidad/1570357128_. | .. | dhosek wrote: | Brilliant! Thanks, the Ransom Center people didn't know who | it was either. They'll be happy to have this info. | reaperducer wrote: | The LoC is a great way to fill up your RSS reader with above | average quality content: https://www.loc.gov/subscribe/#blogs | qq66 wrote: | One thing that most people don't have an appreciation for is | how effective the non-political departments of the US | Government are, and also how at risk such jewels are for | backsliding into incompetence and corruption if poorly managed. | nopenopenopeno wrote: | That's right, because many departments have their | effectiveness undermined by legislation with the intent of | undermining the existence of those departments altogether. | conradev wrote: | The Library of Congress was not doing enough to digitize | their library: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive | /2015/06/hirin... | | The Internet Archive and Google Books have a significant head | start over the largest library in the world | acdha wrote: | Note that a lot has changed since 2015. The LOC's Strategic | Plan (https://www.loc.gov/strategic-plan/) and especially | the digital strategy (https://www.loc.gov/digital- | strategy/) are trying to address that gap -- under the "We | will throw open the treasure chest" section: | | > The Library's content, programs, and expertise are | national treasures - we are dedicated to sharing them as | broadly as possible. The growth of the Library's digital | content, which includes our collections, has increased | exponentially every year. We will make that content | available and accessible to more people, work carefully to | respect the expectations of the Congress and the rights of | creators, and support the use of our content in software- | enabled research, art, exploration, and learning. | | > Exponentially grow our collections | | > The Library will continue to build a universal and | enduring source of knowledge and creativity. We will expand | our digital acquisitions program, as outlined in Collecting | Digital Content at the Library of Congress; continue our | aggressive digitization program, which prioritizes the | Library's unique treasures; and improve search and access | services that facilitate discovery of materials in both | physical and digital formats. | | > We will expedite the availability of newly acquired or | created content to the web and on-site access systems. This | will mean making improvements to the procedures and tools | we use to move content from acquisition or creation to | access, which will be critical as we continue to experience | exponential growth in the size of our digital collection. | We will also improve tools to make it easier for Library | staff to enhance content after publication, such as adding | additional description or information about the | conservation of objects. | sh34r wrote: | You're comparing two very different things there. | Institutional libraries and government archives have | records going back centuries, many of which can't be found | anywhere else. Even your local library might have some | obscure local newspapers on microfilm from 100 years ago, | that haven't been digitized yet (we've admittedly made | progress on this problem over the last decade). | | To answer these "who am I" questions posed in the article, | of unidentified historical photos, we need institutions | like the Library of Congress digitizing their records, | uniting them with other institutional datasets, and | organizing them in a way that we can run facial recognition | algorithms on them. The answer to "who are these musicians | circa 1930" probably comes from a local newspaper that | ended publication 50 years ago. | | In case it isn't abundantly clear, this is going to take | decades to accomplish. These institutions operate on | timelines measured in centuries, not weeks. They care | deeply about problems like bit rot when replacing physical | archives. If it is lost to the world in mere decades, it is | not useful to them. | | The Internet Archive is of little help here, beyond sharing | technical information for efficient archival and retrieval | of truly massive public datasets. | wpietri wrote: | > You're comparing two very different things there. | | This is such an important point. Governments have | longevity and universal service requirements that others | just don't. I am personally a charge-ahead-and-try-shit | kind of person. But I recognize that works for me because | I can easily say "fuck it" and move on from my | experiments. Anything the LOC does they're stuck with, | possibly for centuries. | | So I'm glad that they proceed at a pace that seems | positively glacial to me. That's what success on those | timescales often requires. | ghaff wrote: | Furthermore, there's digitizing things and there's | providing unlimited open access to those digitized | things. The LoC needs to tread lightly on the latter to a | degree that other institutions may choose not to do. Just | because they're the LoC doesn't mean they can throw open | digital access to anything they feel like. | xyzzyz wrote: | This is true because the non-political departments of US | government have ultimately very limited power, so there is | little incentive to either capture them or destroy them by | partisan actors. Political operatives would _much_ rather | control something like FBI or EEOC instead of LoC or USFS. | This should motivate us to ensure that each department's | capabilities are as restricted as possible to achieve its | mandate, so that Library of Congress can focus on archiving | materials, and not, say, drafting rules on what is required | and banned from public libraries across the country (a very | contentious topic these days, apparently). | | Of course, the political operatives want the opposite: they | want to concentrate and extend the power of government | agencies as much as possible. The incentive to do so for | administrative agencies is strong: elected politicians can be | voted out, so they have to be more careful, but career | bureaucrats are effectively not removable. The result is a | fight for the control of the agency, and then, if one side | wins the control, to diminish the power/funding of the | agency, which obviously is not conducive to agency being | effective at its stated goals. | toss1 wrote: | Good description of the essence of democracy and the path | of it sliding into authoritarianism. | | In a democracy all of the institutions of government and | society are relatively independent, with power spread out | and relatively balanced between them. This goes for the | Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of govt, as | well as the civil service, the press, the academy, | industry. | | In contrast, as politicians start controlling "something | like FBI or EEOC", and start forcing the justice | department, the press, academic institutions and other | government and societal structures to bend to the will of | the leader, you soon have authoritarianism. | | Once it goes that way, it is very difficult to restore a | democracy. | yucky wrote: | I would argue that's an inevitability with democracy, | since short term thinking tends to dominate. | toss1 wrote: | You are certainly right, it is not constantly and | actively maintained. | | After the Constitutional Convention in 1787, it's said | that when Ben Franklin was walking out of Independence | Hall, someone yelled: "Doctor, what have we got? A | republic or a monarchy?" | | To which Franklin responded: "A republic, if you can keep | it." | | Wise Words. | | And, as Plato said: "The penalty for good men not | participating in politics is to be ruled by evil men.". | mherdeg wrote: | Huh I always thought of the Library of Congress as having | pretty strong political power -- under the DMCA Section | 1201, every 3 years the Librarian of Congress enacts new | rules proposed by the Copyright Office (part of the LOC) | and can broadly determine that entire categories of | software are not illegal DRM-circumvention devices. | Natsu wrote: | They see that power as very, very narrow. For one, they | have to renew exceptions every 3 years, for another, | they've shied away from doing anything at all to some of | the broader categories that have been proposed. | [deleted] | aasasd wrote: | The man in the 'Baba Yaga' photo looks very Mongol, Yakut or | thereabouts. | | (Coincidentally, apparently there's currently a thriving scene of | low-budget cinema and documentary in Yakutia--if my memory is not | mistaking it with another one of those eastern republics.) | pvinis wrote: | I would expect the valve bald head there too. Was that ever | identified? | shmde wrote: | He is probably in Gabe's basement playing l4d2. | pbhjpbhj wrote: | I'd have thought the Valve head was 3D art, not from a | photographic source. I guess maybe that level of detail wasn't | possible when it was created though? | hbn wrote: | It was a real guy. There were actually a couple Valve | mascots, a guy with a valve coming from his eye, and one with | it coming from the back of his head (the more famous one) | | Apparently they just found a couple guys off the street to | take photos of, but didn't keep their names or anything so | nobody knows who they are. Though they did actually end up | doing a 3D model recreation of the second guy for Half Life: | Alyx (the VR title) | | https://half-life.fandom.com/wiki/Mr._Valve | te wrote: | So all you need to do to identify strangers is snap a photo and | mail it to the LoC? | rurban wrote: | Their already solved picture puzzles are easier to read: | https://blogs.loc.gov/now-see-hear/2018/05/hard-won-victorie... | zucked wrote: | Definitely don't know the people in the photos, but I do love the | work the LoC does - it's so delightfully broad and wonky. | coldpie wrote: | I learned recently that the LoC has a whole bunch fascinating | blogs: https://blogs.loc.gov/ I find the "Preservation" one | most interesting personally, but they've got a huge variety of | topics. | kej wrote: | I would have expected the Library of Congress to have thousands | or even millions of unidentified photographs, so I'm curious what | the reasoning is behind these 17 receiving such special | attention. | kwhitefoot wrote: | You have to start somewhere? | robga wrote: | They've been doing this for a while. This post is headlined | "One Last Time". | | In this 2018 link, 23rd in a series, the LoC says it has | "exhausted its currently slate of unidentified stills" | | So, they have very few unidentified stills in the Moving Image | and Recorded Sound division of the Library of Congress. | | https://blogs.loc.gov/now-see-hear/2018/01/photo-blog-23-fin... | sebmellen wrote: | > "Our crowd-sourcing via this and other LC blogs has proved to | be a spectacular success. We started with well over 200 | "unknowns" and, now, we have only 18 we don't know! Thank you | all!" | echelon wrote: | I wonder if it'll be possible to do a reverse genealogy search | from photos in the future. We have huge databases of faces, and | I'd wager both Facebook and the department of transportation | probably have sufficient parts of this tree to work with. | | Facial phenotype correlates to genes, though stresses of life | take their own independent toll. | | Obviously some branches will wind up not producing children, but | we might be able to look back quite a bit. | | Does anyone know of research ongoing in this area? | dylan604 wrote: | Seems like something the big ancestry website would be able to | do. People have been plugging data into that website for | decades. I would totally be shocked if they didn't have a way | of viewing a literal family tree with all of the images. | Probably even make a Sirius Black wall for you if you pay | enough and subject yourself to all of the shady website games | they play | adolph wrote: | Seems like an aspect of the field was in the news last month: | | https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/doppelgangers-dont... | mkmk wrote: | It would be wonderful to use a search engine that could find | historical photos of my ancestors, if they exist. | innocentoldguy wrote: | familysearch.org has a lot of old photos that people have | uploaded. I was able to find quite a few photos of my | ancestors there. ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2022-09-26 23:00 UTC)