4 ms·

This seems sorta unethical, like this could very easily be biased against one group by training data. Then if this were rolled out to a Target, they could use t

This seems sorta unethical, like this could very easily be biased against one group by training data. Then if this were rolled out to a Target, they could use this to profile people and just point to the "algorithm". Oh, the computer says you look "shady", you can't shop here...

uoaei 7y ago
Phrenology in the Cyberpunk Age
- in3d 7y ago
  Phrenology ideas were junk but that doesn’t mean that looking at people you learn nothing. For example, the brain size is 0.3-0.4 correlated to IQ.
  - tsimionescu 7y ago
    And since IQ is an almost meaningless measure, so is brain size!
    - asguy 7y ago
      Meaningless to whom? Do we have a better intelligence metric these days? ... or is this satire?
      - jjeaff 7y ago
        Meaningless to everyone except for those that care about IQ.
      - tsimionescu 7y ago
        The fact that we don't have a good metric of intelligence doesn't make iq a useful measure of intelligence. IQ is only useful in determining pathologies, at the lower end, where any test is usually helpful. For anything else, it's almost entirely snake oil. If you want to know whether someone is good at something, the best way to test that is to do a test for that particular thing. A test for general inteligence, based on the assumption that general intelligence aptitude is normally distributed in the population, is just not good for anything, and is unlikely to be a reflection of reality, it's pure scientism (instead of science).
  - uoaei 7y ago
    There are certainly ways to glean information from people that is otherwise unavailable to a naive observer, like looking at how they walk and intuiting their motives. The issue is when others appropriate the language and rhetoric to serve their own selfish goals, e.g., eugenics.
gowld 7y ago
boomark for next time a China hate-parade comes around: OP is treading the same water as https://arxiv.org/pdf/1611.04135v1.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/1611.04135v1.pdf "Automated Inference on Criminality using Face Images"

uoaei 7y ago

Phrenology in the Cyberpunk Age

in3d 7y ago
Phrenology ideas were junk but that doesn’t mean that looking at people you learn nothing. For example, the brain size is 0.3-0.4 correlated to IQ.
- tsimionescu 7y ago
  And since IQ is an almost meaningless measure, so is brain size!
  - asguy 7y ago
    Meaningless to whom? Do we have a better intelligence metric these days? ... or is this satire?
    - jjeaff 7y ago
      Meaningless to everyone except for those that care about IQ.
    - tsimionescu 7y ago
      The fact that we don't have a good metric of intelligence doesn't make iq a useful measure of intelligence. IQ is only useful in determining pathologies, at the lower end, where any test is usually helpful. For anything else, it's almost entirely snake oil. If you want to know whether someone is good at something, the best way to test that is to do a test for that particular thing. A test for general inteligence, based on the assumption that general intelligence aptitude is normally distributed in the population, is just not good for anything, and is unlikely to be a reflection of reality, it's pure scientism (instead of science).
- uoaei 7y ago
  There are certainly ways to glean information from people that is otherwise unavailable to a naive observer, like looking at how they walk and intuiting their motives. The issue is when others appropriate the language and rhetoric to serve their own selfish goals, e.g., eugenics.

gowld 7y ago

boomark for next time a China hate-parade comes around: OP is treading the same water as https://arxiv.org/pdf/1611.04135v1.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/1611.04135v1.pdf "Automated Inference on Criminality using Face Images"