While this linear model’s overall predictive accuracy barely outperformed random guessing,
I was tempted to write this up for Pivot but fuck giving that blog any sort of publicity.
the rest of the site is a stupendous assortment of a very small field of focus that made this ideal for sneerclub and not just techtakes
Is this some sort of bait or is he really expecting this to help in whatever way it is he imagines this would help?
Really wonder if his own pictures are included in the training set (as negative examples, of course)
Yeah including people you dont like ‘accidentally’ is a big risk. Also per definition the data only includes known/convicted pedos.
That was gross.
On a related note, one of my kids learnt about how phrenology was once used for scientific racism and my other kid was shocked, dismayed and didn’t want to believe it. So I had to confirm that yes people did that, yes it was very racist, and yes they considered themselves scientists and were viewed as such by the scientific community of the time.
I didn’t inform them that phrenology and scientific racism is still with us. There is a limit on how many illusions you want to break in a day.
If you really want AI to catch pedophiles you need to train it with a database of priests and pastors.
Also a photo of all of Epstein’s friends and “ex” friends
Hashemi and Hall (2020) published research demonstrating that convolutional neural networks could distinguish between “criminal” and “non-criminal” facial images with a reported accuracy of 97% on their test set. While this paper was later retracted for ethical concerns rather than methodological flaws,
That’s not really a sentence that should begin with “While”, now, is it?
it highlighted the potential for facial analysis to extend beyond physical attributes into behavior prediction.
What the fuck is wrong with you?
it highlighted the potential for facial analysis to extend beyond physical attributes into behavior prediction.
bouba/kiki prison industrial complex
The implication here that it isnt methodically flawed is quite something.
E: and I don’t have the inclination for to do the math, but a 97% accuracy seems to be on the unusable side considering the rate of ‘criminals’ vs not-criminals in the population. (Yeah, see also ‘wtf even is a criminal’).
about 3 in 100 americans are in prison, on parole, etc. so if that’s the definition of a criminal, you would get 97% accuracy by just guessing not criminal every time
(At the brainstorming session for terrible software names)
“PedoAI!”
Oh hey it’s a rehash of the pedosmile maddox post from a billion internet years ago.
The war on weird looking people continues. (The false positive/negative rate of this bs is immense. Wait a 69% succes rate? Ow god the false positives on that are going to be immense (even worse, the model works worse than random chance on a online game dataset, and then also the statistical uselessness of 69% due to low amount of pedos in general public isn’t even mentioned in the conclusions, toss this where it belongs, in the dustbin of history).
The war on weird looking people continues.
Well, maybe if they had more eugenic facial symmetry and stronger jawlines, they’d be able to find age-appropriate sexual partners…
let’s not (even in jest)
I’m guessing that no one copied this guy’s science homework when he was at school.
I picked the wrong week to be an older, white, overweight man. 😱
His commenters really didn’t like the ‘white’ part.
holy fuck
Interesting study, but I am skeptical that this result applies to the general population (without the “convicted” qualifier).
If non-whites are more violently criminal than whites, then we can expect them to be imprisoned earlier in life for any violent crime, of which pedophilia will be a small subset.
So we have more convicted white paedos because … the coloreds do more crimes??! what in the actual fuck did I just read?
No, no, it means non-white pedos will be jailed earlier in their lives. Makes perfect sense, dinnit?
