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

  • blakestaceyMA
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    9 months ago

    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?

    • swlabr
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      9 months ago

      it highlighted the potential for facial analysis to extend beyond physical attributes into behavior prediction.

      bouba/kiki prison industrial complex

    • David GerardOPMA
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      9 months ago

      What the fuck is wrong with you?

      the blog tagline is “Dysgenics, forecasting, machine learning, sociology, physiognomy, IQ, simulations”, so he tells us straight up what’s wrong with him

      • Architeuthis
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        9 months ago

        I hate being reminded that besides phrenology physiognomy is also a thing.

    • Soyweiser
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      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’).

      • sc_griffith
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        9 months ago

        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

        • Soyweiser
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          9 months ago

          Also an extremely good false positive rate

    • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.socialBanned
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      9 months ago

      Racist ideology predicted by a degenerated frontal lobe!

      It’s not related to their skull shape, they just have brain damage.