191–200 of 421 posts
Representing the conservative and liberal groups as gaussian mixes of multiple atributes, I would expect those two peaks to overlap. Perhaps the real surprise is that they overlap no more than 28%.
May be the world polarising into two kind of extreme polarisization: one with a sense of humor and one without it. And it has a noticeable effect on the face. I'd love to see few samples of faces from each class.
I think the key line is how much better this system is than humans attempting the same task: > Political orientation was correctly classified in 72% of liberal–conservative face pairs, remarkably better than chance (50%), human accuracy (55%), or one afforded by a 100-item personality questionnaire (66%). This isn't a matter of "recognize that old white people are conservative", because people will do that already, a…
There's an avalanche of people commenting on this who didn't bother to check the article before raising their methodological objections, so let's get these out of the way here. - Yes, they controlled for objects appearing in the pictures that might indicate political affiliation. The images are tightly cropped around the face. See Methods. - Yes, this is significantly better than both a coin flip and a human classifi…
So even filtering for the extremely limited number of things that you allow us to find problematic, by their own admission : - they know that it's actually probably "working" (lol 72%) because of other biases they didn't take into account - Ultimately it puts people into 2 bins which are both huge and disparate and reduce complexe multi-dimensional elements to a meaningless binary. cool cool cool.
> the relative universality of the conservative–liberal spectrum Grey tribe members may beg to differ https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/insights/rise-liberaltarian
Employers, condos, schools, many communities will want to ML-screen candidates, be it officially or not..
There's an avalanche of people commenting on this who didn't bother to check the article before raising their methodological objections, so let's get these out of the way here. - Yes, they controlled for objects appearing in the pictures that might indicate political affiliation. The images are tightly cropped around the face. See Methods. - Yes, this is significantly better than both a coin flip and a human classifi…
Where do they say that they gave the same test for to humans? All I find is the reference [15] that points to https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232255935_Accuracy_... that cite a previous article about a different set of photos and a different question.
I assume there's no way to actually verify how someone may choose to vote, assuming there's no record of that? I think there's huge value now that everything is being sent into a "machine" or "the algorithm" in fucking with it. Order sex toys from Amazon, show them you're into outrageous books and fool them into creating a fake profile of "you", based on your spending, browsing and other data you generate. I'd love t…
> I'm too old to vote now There are places with a maximum voting age?
For instance:
The type of camera used will vary in ways correlated with the person's lifestyle. Richer people will be more likely to use a recent flagship, for instance. Various brands have different popularity with different groups. Perhaps the algorithm is picking up on the different models of camera?
The pictures are drawn from various different websites. Perhaps these websites use different software or different settings to compress images and the algorithm can pick up on that.
Perhaps old photos are compressed with different settings than new ones, or may have been re-encoded multiple times.
A more tech-savvy user is more likely to encode their pictures properly, while a user who is less knowledgeable might upload an image that has artifacts. Similarly, some users will upload images that are out of focus or poorly-lit.