Technology

58122 readers

3888 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

-61

AI Can Tell Your Political Affiliation Just by Looking at Your Face, Researchers Find (gizmodo.com)

submitted 4 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

36 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

idk what Phrenology or crime have anything to do with the study and I'm yet to see an argument for it

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

The headline is clearly false, you can't tell political affiliation just by looking at a persons face.
Maybe in USA you have a slightly better chance than random, because age and gender alone will give a statistical difference. But the claim of the headline remains false.

The claim of the headline is reiterated in the article:

A study recently published in the peer-reviewed American Psychologist journal claims that a combination of facial recognition and artificial intelligence technology can accurately assess a person’s political orientation by simply looking at that person’s blank, expressionless face.

Further down:

So, according to this theory, if you have a tiny face, you’re probably a progressive. Or, by contrast, if you have a big fat face, there’s a good chance you might be a Trump voter.

This simply can't be true, if it was the attempt at a Phrenology/Craniology science would have detected it 200 years ago.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago

100% a response to the headline, which clearly must be false

It is, my bad - I thought that was obvious. The headline and the article conclusion contradict the study itself, it's just clickbait.

But the study is not invalid because of it.