4 ms·
That is testable. Prison populations should look different in areas where a larger fraction of serious crimes are solved. (It is hardly likely that a large enou
by berntb 10y ago
That is testable. Prison populations should look different in areas where a larger fraction of serious crimes are solved. (It is hardly likely that a large enough fraction of people in prison are innocent to influence TFA's gigantic results of 89+%!)
So Occam's razor seems to imply that something changes in the face for people with e.g. (lead) poisoning, brain defects leading to psychopathy/violent tendencies or something else?
It could alternatively be in the life style of criminals. Drug use or attitude to others? Someone that really prey on people might even have changed hormone levels, or something, as it might be an evolutionary strategy?
Or just body language, but not for face pictures of course. In Sweden, when a state security group hired people with police training, they didn't hire police that ever worked on the streets because it changes the body language in some way; they are recognized by criminals -- and vice versa. (This is old, I have no clue how it is today.)
- berntb 10y agoThis BBC article also quotes people arguing that this recognition might just be a tendency for a judge/jury to find someone guilty. Again, that can't explain how you can reach 89.5% hit frequency?! Even in China, there needs to be some evidence... right? To me, that argument sounds like "double think", because of fears of a 1984 society -- where people are characterized from their faces. (That is stupid, if this can really be refined and made to work, then active criminals would just do cosmetic operations.) If those results goes against your ideology, just note that it isn't peer reviewed yet. :-) http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-38092196 http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-38092196