AI can recognise FAGGOTS by just their face

This is a load of crap. Your face changes throughout your life, but your soul does not.

>>9155635
>make an AI look for gay stereotypes
>test it by showing it the gay stereotypes that you programmed it to look for
>"It works, give us money"

Physiognomy is real.

Are you really going to make pretend there isn't a "gay look"?

>>9155640
Your soul is conscious of your faggotry, repent, sinner.

>>9155644
Try reading faggot.
>including that gay men had narrower jaws, longer noses and larger foreheads than straight men, and that gay women had larger jaws and smaller foreheads compared to straight women.

It's not just bullshit faggot poses.

Let me know when I can scan my face to find out if I'm gay

>>9155651
Maybe one of these days Facebook will launch "tag gay" feature.

>>9155649
>narrower jaws, longer noses and larger foreheads
>this is now the criteria to be gay
wow really impressive there cs scum

>>9155667
>HURR

If it works, it works.

File: 1440233468118.jpg (61KB, 465x512px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 465x512px

>>9155668
>If it works, it works.
let me guess, you're an engineer

>>9155667
>muh phenotype

>>9155676
let me guess, you're a faggot?

>>9155676
>>broader lips jaws, wider noses and darker skin
>>this is now the criteria to be black
>wow really impressive there cs scum

Tell us more about how machines will never be able to tell a person's race from a picture, dope.

>>9155682
race =/= to sexuality brainlet. way to get out of context. next time just get out

>>9155686
can't wait for AI to tell fake "natives" and other mixed-race that they are not white/black/abbo/whatever

>>9155686
>HURR physical differences only exist between races!

Dope.

File: Mike_Pence.jpg (703KB, 950x1409px) Image search: [Google]

703KB, 950x1409px

>>9155686
>AI can tell race from face
>can't tell a gay from normal
AI beats most people at single tasks it was bound to happen.

>>9155635
So, this is why my gaydar sense is off the charts IRL. It didn't make sense to me or anyone else, but I guess I was picking up on something that was fundamentally different. I still think it is more body language than anything else.

>>9155635
Some gay men (not sure if most) when getting their picture taken try to keep their eyes looking as "bright" as possible. Just like straight women, they never have their brows furrowed or squint their eyes. They also have that fake, womanly cheer when they smile. Butch dykes are just the opposite.

>>9155708
>>9155705

Could it be that poses and mannerisms cause facial changes, i.e. folds and musculature?

>>9155711
To some extent, yes. Bone and cartilage, no.

>>9155711
Only for soft tissue, although supposedly how you hold your face also determines how its bones grow. I wonder if this study is measuring absolute facial widths or relative ratios.

>>9155717
>Bone and cartilage
It might be that physiognomy is actually true, and we probably will get a fairly good agreement with AI.

>>9155635
Next they'll create a racist AI capable to recognize blacks. Boycott Google!

>>9155635
Shitty AI paper start to float.

>>9155635
>/sci/ absolutely on suicide watch.
/pol/ was right again.
I thought it was the opposite and it was /pol/ who claimed that being gay was a choice (and therefore degeneracy). But yeah, claiming that there are no biological factors to homosexuality sounds pretty dumb.

>>9155761
No, that's Christians. /pol/ is closer to Alex Jones on the gay epidemic caused by plastics. /pol/ has a super hardon for eugenics.

>>9155761
It is just further proof that there's no such thing as free will.

>>9155705
I've got it too and I agree. I'm legit autistic but I've spooked my family with how accurate I can be given limited information. I don't know if I need to see a face to do it, though.

Last time I guessed, I knew two guys were renting my mom's condo, and all I asked was, "Were they touching each other?" She interpreted a few pats on the back as friendly behavior. But, sure enough, a couple weeks go by and we find only one used bed in the house.

For me it's sort of a "look for the signs" type deal. It's a very psychological thing; I never considered facial structure as having much to do with it.

File: 1491607115064.jpg (151KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 800x600px

>The paper suggested that the findings provide “strong support” for the theory that sexual orientation stems from exposure to certain hormones before birth, meaning people are born gay and being queer is not a choice.
>/sci/ on suicide watch

Why? /sci/ has been the ones saying homosexuality was genetic (thus all the threads about what is the biological benefit in nature) while /pol/ was saying it was choice to justify they just being degenerates.

If the A.I. can prove being gay is genetic, religious and conservative fags lose big time because now all there efforts are seen as high level discrimination akin to racism.

However we need to see the actual written code and referenced mathematical formulas that we're utilized for their algorithm to make sure it's accurate.

Also I would say that if this holds up it's a huge win for the epigenetics crowd since it lends more evidence that the external environment can affect you.

>>9155805
Republicans will no doubt end up arguing that lifestyle choices make your face look the way it does. Climate change, stem cell research, War on Drugs, rape ("A woman has ways to shut that whole thing down.") - it's all part of a pattern. They decide the truth, and then they find the evidence.

File: lachende Mädchen.jpg (60KB, 656x640px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 656x640px

>>9155765
>he doesn't support eugenics

>>9155677
Why did you just repeat the same thing back to that guy?

>>9155677
Meant for >>9155678

>>9155635

strange that i can do this already, without an app.

I'm sorry but I'm just having a hard time believing this crap. I was lead under the assumption that you can find traits of a gay person based on behavior and internal qualities, not by external qualities. For God's sake what the hell type of facial characteristics would even fall under "gay face"? What would happen if a straight guy happened to hold at least ONE these facial characteristics?

>AI
>Inference

Why the fuck didn't they just run a model on this? Whatever Network or other statistical learning method they used for this cannot offer scientific evidence. Black boxes do not allow for proper controls or experiments.

>>9156688
you're a black box

This doesn't prove being gay is genetic, that would technically be incorrect. Your facial characteristics, like many things, are altered by prenatal hormones. The same hormonal imbalance that causes a man to have certain facial characteristics also strongly influences your sexual attitudes. There will never be evidence of a genetic cause of homosexuality, the idea that there will is preposterous.
t. actual faggot

File: 2ec.png (208KB, 327x316px) Image search: [Google]

208KB, 327x316px

>>9155635
>tfw straight looking fag
feels good

>>9156712
We'll be the judges of that. Show us your face faggot.

File: 1475372224391.gif (2MB, 277x342px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 277x342px

First of all, it's still not peer-reviewed, they just stuck it up on OSF: https://osf.io/zn79k/
It's being done at the Stanford Graduate School of Business, not any kind of science or technology department.

The title is: "Deep neural networks are more accurate than humans at detecting sexual orientation from facial images." The actual result is that they trained a neural network to be more accurate than *untrained*, *unmotivated*, *uninterested* humans at detecting sexual orientation.

The AI had access to 95% (~3800 per category) of the sample to practice on, and the testing was done on the other 5% (~200 per category).

They took no particular effort to prevent duplicate persons from being included in the set, even though people commonly make multiple dating accounts and use other people's pictures, so much of the accuracy may have resulted from the system effectively recognizing people it knows are gay from the training set. It took into account things like grooming and facial expression, on dating sites.

The humans were hired on Mechanical Turk and simply told to make their best guess. They were not paid based on their performance, but only for completing the task (i.e. no reason to care about getting it right). They were given no opportunity to study the thousands of examples the AI was trained on. As far as I can tell, the paper doesn't mention how many humans participated. I'm not sure they know, given how Mechanical Turk works.

Look at how they interpret the results:
>The findings reported in this work show that our faces contain more information about sexual orientation than can be perceived or interpreted by the human brain.

This was a bozo study, by bozos.

>9156713
nice try fag, not even worth @you

File: 1500305425818.png (642KB, 540x960px) Image search: [Google]

642KB, 540x960px

>>9155635
This guy is a fag and I have pictures of him sucking dick and taking it up the butt. This AI doesn't prove anything

>>9156727
>narrow jaw (hidden by beard (cope))
>long nose
>medium-large forehead
>high fat estrogen body
that's a fag alright

I hate when they say something suggests strong support for something when it's not entirely clear.. What if having the gay look makes people think you're gay so you get treated gay and that leads to a better chance of you deciding to be gay?

I love bitches but dudes like me quite often and it's definitely my face. Sort of regular but kinda modely with the high cheek bones but also kinda baby with the small chin. Girls like it too, in fact they have said stuff like I freaking love your face like they're about to come but then also there are the drunk dudes at the bar telling how pretty I am. Reasonably I would have a higher chance of deciding to be gay because of the attention

This seems like liberal agenda type stuff but it comes off almost like the opposite, like it justifies discrimination and prejudice based on appearance

>>9156746
this guy would beat the shit out of you, nerd.

>>9155836
I cant believe merkel was nazi

>>9156720
>The AI had access to 95% (~3800 per category) of the sample to practice on, and the testing was done on the other 5% (~200 per category).
>They took no particular effort to prevent duplicate persons from being included in the set, even though people commonly make multiple dating accounts and use other people's pictures, so much of the accuracy may have resulted from the system effectively recognizing people it knows are gay from the training set. It took into account things like grooming and facial expression, on dating sites.
lmao, bet you they didn't even cross-validate

>>The findings reported in this work show that our faces contain more information about sexual orientation than can be perceived or interpreted by the human brain.
Except always guessing straight would have a less margin of error. Wait, don't tell me they didn't include class probabilities either

Doesn't this BTFO liberals who say "people who hate gays are just closet gays"?

File: IMG_0144.jpg (85KB, 412x600px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 412x600px

>>9155649
>longer noses

>>9156727

Look at his eyebrows. He's doing that same twisty fairy thing with them that Tom Hardy does.

>>9155805
>being gay is not a choice
Why is this idea some kind of holy grail for liberals? Just because it's not a "choice" doesn't mean that it's not harmful or unethical. Tyrone didn't ask to be born with low impulse control, but we still lock him up when he starts shit.

>>9155823
>muh boogeyman Republicans

>The paper suggested that the findings provide “strong support” for the theory that sexual orientation stems from exposure to certain hormones before birth, meaning people are born gay and being queer is not a choice.
Behavior influences testosterone which influences body shape. If the paper is biased enough to have this conclusion, it's worth jack shit.

>>9156669
It's not in any one feature, but a combination of them. Faggots act differently, and thus their faces look different, because they use their muscles in different patterns. You seriously have not noticed that people's personalities generally match their faces? It's one of the main heuristics we use to judge character. Why do you think criminals are so ugly? It's simply a fact, that good people will look good, and twisted people will look twisted. It doesn't matter if it's "environment" or "genetics"; it's both and neither, because there is no such distinction. Some instincts are so deep that they cannot be changed by any politics (for example, hatred of ugliness. We cannot love something that is ugly, only tolerate it), and the natural reactions which we have to stimuli at this level should be considered on the same level as the stimuli itself.

It's 2017, real biology is (presumably) a thing, but people still distinguish between "internal qualities" and "external qualities" like it's the fucking 1600s. There is no soul, and therefore the distinction between "internal" and "external" qualities is immaterial.