Matt Drudge links to this Guardian article about our fascinating future:
New AI can guess whether you're gay or straight from a photograph
An algorithm deduced the sexuality of people on a dating site with up to 91% accuracy, raising tricky ethical questions
Well, my HI (Human Intelligence, der) can smell clickbait a mile away, but here I go anyway:
Artificial intelligence can accurately guess whether people are gay or straight based on photos of their faces, according to new research suggesting that machines can have significantly better “gaydar” than humans.
The study from Stanford University – which found that a computer algorithm could correctly distinguish between gay and straight men 81% of the time, and 74% for women – has raised questions about the biological origins of sexual orientation, the ethics of facial-detection technology and the potential for this kind of software to violate people’s privacy or be abused for anti-LGBT purposes.
Please at least read the Guardian summary, which notes some important scientific points and includes helpful caveats. But I want to perseverate about what I am sure is an exaggerated privacy issue, so back to the Guardian:
With billions of facial images of people stored on social media sites and in government databases, the researchers suggested that public data could be used to detect people’s sexual orientation without their consent.
It’s easy to imagine spouses using the technology on partners they suspect are closeted, or teenagers using the algorithm on themselves or their peers. More frighteningly, governments that continue to prosecute LGBT people could hypothetically use the technology to out and target populations. That means building this kind of software and publicizing it is itself controversial given concerns that it could encourage harmful applications.
Don't panic! First, this study was based on self-outed photos available on dating sites and the authors discovered that some indicators overlap with grooming and style choices (e.g., baseball caps and beards for straight men, high necklines for lesbians), not just biologically determined facial features. Consequently, one risks moving beyond the experimental boundaries in trying to apply this AI technique to closeted gays.
But I promised some Bayes and I know what you're thinking. No I don't, that's Mark Zuckerberg's area. But I know what I was thinking: If gays are roughly 5% of the population I can achieve 95% accuracy in a sample of 1000 photos by deeming them all to be straight. Big time-saver too.
Of course, that trick leaves me 100% accurate on straights and 0% accurate on gays so if my job description includes singling gays out for harassment I may be at risk of a quick out-placement. On the other hand, one wonders just what the "91%" accuracy" cited by the Guardian means.
Well, it turns out that the researchers used a study where straights and gays were roughly 50/50. The human counterparts were given this task even more clearly. From the study:
Well, then. It is a lot easier to find needles in a haystack if the stack is half needles. But surely the authors don't think they can carry this 91% accuracy in a 50/50 population into the real world, do they?
MSNBC Panel Frets 'Racist Agenda' of 'Very Dangerous' Sessions to 'Hold Minorities Down'
Posted by: Extraneus | September 08, 2017 at 02:49 PM
University receives $138,000 in federal grant money to study preschoolers’ gender identity
Posted by: Extraneus | September 08, 2017 at 02:51 PM
GOP outraged after Trump refuses to consider Lois Lerner prosecution
Ok, I'll stop spamming the thread now. :-)
Posted by: Extraneus | September 08, 2017 at 02:56 PM
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/trump-is-more-serious-than-you-think-about-building-the-border-wall/article/2633832
Posted by: Miss Marple the Deplorable | September 08, 2017 at 02:56 PM
What I can't find, Ext, is a link to Boyd's letter.
Where is the quote that implicates Trump?
Ultimately, from what the article does feature, it appears as though Issa, Chafed-putz, and Gowdy Doody did a terrible job of evidence gathering.
Posted by: Threadkiller | September 08, 2017 at 03:06 PM
The flamingos remind me of Saki's story, The Stalled Ox. Very funny Edwardian writer, if you haven't partaken.
Posted by: Ralph L | September 08, 2017 at 03:06 PM
Extraneous:
I find no consequences for Liar Lois Lerner disturbing.
Posted by: maryrose | September 08, 2017 at 03:06 PM
sbw, I don't think your feedback is working
I know it isn’t.
Posted by: sbw | September 08, 2017 at 03:07 PM
I think Lois Learner is outside the focus of the cone for now.
Let’s see after the midterms. And I am predicting a Trump gain on both sides of the aisle. Changes in political alignment are happening.
But what do I know?
Posted by: sbw | September 08, 2017 at 03:09 PM
Most dishwashers have an air vent to dry your dishes. I don't know if there's a one-way valve on them, or if it's strong enough to withstand immersion.
Posted by: Ralph L | September 08, 2017 at 03:14 PM
I'd rather prosecute Lerner than build the wall, and I'm for the wall.
Posted by: Janeprobably about 10 minutes after getting there | September 08, 2017 at 03:17 PM
The Republican House Ways and Means Cmmt Chair from TX didn't win his R primary decisively last time. I can easily imagine Trump targeting Republican obstructionists by finding strong primary challengers who'll run on supporting his agenda.
Posted by: DebinGA | September 08, 2017 at 03:21 PM
I'd rather prosecute the people who cleaned up after Lerner.
Posted by: Ralph L | September 08, 2017 at 03:29 PM
"I'd rather prosecute ..."
Let's embrace the word "and" in this case, shall we? :)
Posted by: JimNorCal | September 08, 2017 at 03:34 PM
From Ace: Three Taco Bell Employees Open Fire on Two Would-Be Robbers, Killing One.
TV station talked to a lawyer about justifiable homicide. Did they expect them to be charged?
Posted by: Ralph L | September 08, 2017 at 03:36 PM
I'm assuming this photo is from a New Hampshire cemetery?
Posted by: JimNorCal | September 08, 2017 at 03:36 PM
Tom McClintock:
September 8, 2017 Vote Notes on Legislation
Vote Note on H.R. 601
H.R. 601 – Three-month Debt Limit Suspension, $230 billion of general spending and $8 billion for Emergency Hurricane Relief.
I supported the clean disaster relief bill for Hurricane Harvey. But I cannot and will not support the cynical use of disasters as an excuse to pack relief bills with extraneous and questionable policies that ought to be considered on their own. This bill left the House with my support to provide $7.9 billion of emergency funding for Hurricane Harvey. Period. It returns from the Senate with a three-month suspension of the debt limit, an additional $230 billion of general government spending unrelated to hurricane relief and $7.4 billion of added spending for Community Development Block Grants (that have notoriously little accountability).
Posted by: Threadkiller | September 08, 2017 at 03:46 PM
The office of legal counsel, has to do with policy, but not prosecutorial decision that would be the criminal division, but he has been a lib time sessions confidant.
Posted by: narciso. | September 08, 2017 at 03:49 PM
I think Lois Learner is outside the focus of the cone for now.
She shouldn't be.
She used her office and her governmental power to attack and silence political opponents. She defied supboenas. She destroyed evidence. She lied to Congress.
Prosecuting someone who openly, proudly does that is pretty basic to restoring the rule of law.
If Jeff Sessions doesn't think so, he needs to go. Today.
Posted by: James D. | September 08, 2017 at 03:50 PM
A previous overview here:
Http://.nationalreview.com/corner/448279/president-trump-meet-department-justice-doj-president-trump
Posted by: narciso. | September 08, 2017 at 03:53 PM
UC Berkeley Offers Counseling Services to Those Upset By Shapiro Speech
Posted by: Extraneus | September 08, 2017 at 04:00 PM
Lerner was the text book case of the Swamp attacking those who wish to drain it.
Seem like a no brainer.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | September 08, 2017 at 04:00 PM
Posted by: Extraneus | September 08, 2017 at 04:01 PM
New thread.
Posted by: Extraneus | September 08, 2017 at 04:10 PM
New thread.
Posted by: henry | September 08, 2017 at 04:10 PM
Here's the link to Narciso's post:http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/448279/president-trump-meet-department-justice-doj-president-trump
Posted by: Clarice Feldman | September 08, 2017 at 04:14 PM
I suspect " "creating a mass social movement to end family breakdown," is 100% opposed by a political group that 100% supports the murder of 60 million plus inconvenient children.
Thanks for the link. Extraneus | September 08, 2017 at 02:39 PM
Posted by: pagar, a bacon, ham and sausage supporter | September 08, 2017 at 04:19 PM
Happy Birthday, Miss Marple!
Posted by: Clarice Feldman | September 08, 2017 at 04:34 PM
There was a thread about being able to tell from a photo whether someone is gay, and nobody posted any of the classic Obama pics?
Posted by: Dave (in MA) | September 08, 2017 at 04:47 PM
New thread/
Posted by: Clarice Feldman | September 08, 2017 at 05:22 PM
@Henry - Re Obama it is my observation that gay men are often married to unattractive women. Draw your own conclusion.
@TM - don't know where you got the five percent figure but my guess is it's wildly understated.
@Jack is back - I'm old enough to remember when Mickey Mantle was sometimes referred to as the third best centerfielder in NY.
Posted by: middyfeek | September 09, 2017 at 06:52 AM