Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

LooksMapping

looksmapping.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 64 posts

Re: LooksMapping

#31

Post by eddythompson80 »

gkbrk wrote: post #26
preetsojitra wrote: post #14

What about the ethical concerns? Scrapping faces of people and feeding them into AI model without their permission.

It's all public pictures though. Why would I publish a picture of my face if I don't want people to have a picture of my face?

Honestly the answer is “most people didn’t really expect that to be a thing when they did that” add those to all the people who “didn’t know that I was giving it to everyone. I thought this was between me and.. like.. yelp and people in my city”

It’s very confusing to technical people, but plenty of people were (still are) confused by the concept of the internet. What do you think all those people posting private information on each other’s facebook walls were doing? They are on their computer talking to their family member. How is anybody else getting in here?

Re: LooksMapping

#33

Post by defyonce »

Top 5 Restaurants (Female vs Male Preferences)

  Female Picks:
  ------------------------------------------------
  1. Big Apple Brunch          | Hell's Kitchen     | 9.2/10
  2. Pietro Nolita             | Nolita             | 8.6/10
  3. Kanü Bar|Grill            | Hamilton Heights   | 8.5/10
  4. STK Steakhouse Downtown   | West Village       | 8.2/10
  5. Lighthouse Fish Market    | East Harlem        | 8.2/10
  
  Male Picks:
  ------------------------------------------------
  1. Lahori Kabab              | Kips Bay           | 2.3/10
  2. Big Arc Chicken           | East Village       | 2.5/10
  3. Hop Won Express           | Midtown East       | 3.1/10
  4. Subway                    | Hell's Kitchen     | 3.1/10
  5. Nica Trattoria            | Upper East Side    | 3.1/10
it looks like female => attractive

Re: LooksMapping

#34

Post by preetsojitra »

gkbrk wrote: post #30
jeauxlb wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can go into an art gallery but I may not touch the works. Often there aren't physical barriers but we all understand some behaviours are not acceptable. Similarly, publication of an image on the internet is not implicit permission to use it for any possible purpose, however technically feasible. For example, deepfakes.

If you draw a mustache on a drawing in an art gallery, you ruin the original for everyone else. If you take the drawing home, no one else has the original any more. If I download, copy, or edit images sent to my computer, the original is still there. The artist puts their art on the gallery with the intent that people will enter that gallery and look at it without touching. The image uploaders uploads the image with…

You're misinterpreting the analogy.

- Drawing a mustache on the art = Vandalizing the original data (not what's happening).

- Taking the art home = Deleting the original data (also not what's happening).

- Scraping faces for an AI = Following visitors around the gallery, taking secret photos of them, and publishing a book that rates them by attractiveness.

The fact that the gallery is "public" does not make that behavior acceptable. The same is true here. "Publicly viewable" does not mean "publicly available for any use."

Re: LooksMapping

#36

Post by gkbrk »

preetsojitra wrote: post #34
gkbrk wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you draw a mustache on a drawing in an art gallery, you ruin the original for everyone else. If you take the drawing home, no one else has the original any more. If I download, copy, or edit images sent to my computer, the original is still there. The artist puts their art on the gallery with the intent that people will enter that gallery and look at it without touching. The image uploaders uploads the image with…

You're misinterpreting the analogy. - Drawing a mustache on the art = Vandalizing the original data (not what's happening). - Taking the art home = Deleting the original data (also not what's happening). - Scraping faces for an AI = Following visitors around the gallery, taking secret photos of them, and publishing a book that rates them by attractiveness. The fact that the gallery is "public" does not make that beha…

> Following visitors around the gallery, taking secret photos of them, and publishing a book that rates them by attractiveness.

Gallery visitors aren't publicly publishing gallery reviews with their pictures. This website doesn't go into restaurants and take pictures of the customers.

All the pictures here were attached to restaurant reviews by the person themselves with the expectation that the picture would be sent to others and be available to people not currently in the restaurant.

Re: LooksMapping

#37

Post by brigandish »

preetsojitra wrote: post #34
gkbrk wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you draw a mustache on a drawing in an art gallery, you ruin the original for everyone else. If you take the drawing home, no one else has the original any more. If I download, copy, or edit images sent to my computer, the original is still there. The artist puts their art on the gallery with the intent that people will enter that gallery and look at it without touching. The image uploaders uploads the image with…

You're misinterpreting the analogy. - Drawing a mustache on the art = Vandalizing the original data (not what's happening). - Taking the art home = Deleting the original data (also not what's happening). - Scraping faces for an AI = Following visitors around the gallery, taking secret photos of them, and publishing a book that rates them by attractiveness. The fact that the gallery is "public" does not make that beha…

> taking secret photos of them,

The visitors took the photo, supplied the photo, and put it in a public place.

Re: LooksMapping

#38

Post by thinkingemote »

eddythompson80 wrote: post #29
thinkingemote wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we use all our senses out in the real world when choosing some place to eat. Seeing the people who eat there is certainly one factor. Online maybe too if we look at the food pictures, read how the items are worded, look at a restaurant website and read the reviews we can get a sense of the types of people it appeals to. It's probably not the primary factor, but it is one attribute. There are anecdotal reports…

The app is cool, but the argument there was either written by AI or there is a lost in translation moment because it doesn’t really make any sense. In your argument you’re basically saying “it’s impossible to know what affects your choice of where to eat. Some think looks matter even pay for it; ergo, we must consider it too” What about music type? Worker’s uniform color? Thinking “I wanna eat where the hot people ar…

> Thinking “I wanna eat where the hot people are” is… I don’t know.. Odd?

Well my response was to the question "Does anyone do this for restaurants?" and tried to answer it by saying "yes, many people may consider it along with other factors"

Yes, I agree it is superficial and odd to consciously and only think it. But we choose things with a range of subconscious influences, multiple reasons. Yes, uniforms and music could also be influences too. We could stop and spend time examining our thoughts and feelings to identify all the factors but generally people don't do that do they? :-)

And if you think about bars... it becomes commonplace for some people. "I want to drink where the hot people are" seems to be a very commonplace thought, or at least a thought which is encouraged by the marketing of bars.

Thinking wider now, we can ponder why do many places hire attractive people in their marketing photos? We humans are more superficial and less rational than we would like to admit to ourselves.

Personally I prefer real ale so will drink where the beer is better, but if I'm on a date where my friend doesn't appreciate beer as much, I will choose a nicer feeling and looking establishment over the beer quality. The people inside the place might or might not influence that choice to a greater or lesser extent. It is at the very least a factor. For a restaurant I think it's less of a factor.

Re: LooksMapping

#39

Post by [deleted] »

gkbrk wrote: post #30
jeauxlb wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can go into an art gallery but I may not touch the works. Often there aren't physical barriers but we all understand some behaviours are not acceptable. Similarly, publication of an image on the internet is not implicit permission to use it for any possible purpose, however technically feasible. For example, deepfakes.

If you draw a mustache on a drawing in an art gallery, you ruin the original for everyone else. If you take the drawing home, no one else has the original any more. If I download, copy, or edit images sent to my computer, the original is still there. The artist puts their art on the gallery with the intent that people will enter that gallery and look at it without touching. The image uploaders uploads the image with…

[deleted]

Re: LooksMapping

#40

Post by foresterre »

defyonce wrote: post #33

Top 5 Restaurants (Female vs Male Preferences) Female Picks: ------------------------------------------------ 1. Big Apple Brunch | Hell's Kitchen | 9.2/10 2. Pietro Nolita | Nolita | 8.6/10 3. Kanü Bar|Grill | Hamilton Heights | 8.5/10 4. STK Steakhouse Downtown | West Village | 8.2/10 5. Lighthouse Fish Market | East Harlem | 8.2/10 Male Picks: ------------------------------------------------ 1. Lahori Kabab | Kips…

This was the first thing that stood out to me too.

I sampled quite some dark red markers, representing "attractive", and on the balance they're almost always overwhelmingly reviewed by females.

There were some exceptions though. Especially in the south west for Chinese cuisine.

Post reply on HN