Michal Kosinski

> As far as i know, it was bogus back then and it's still bogus in 2020. I'm not aware of any other newer replications https://arxiv.org/abs/1902.10739 is the latest. Why...

> Yes I agree it was bad research but the damage has been done to society. Why do you think so, David? Have you read the paper you are dismissing...

That's precisely the point of our research. We did not build a privacy-invading AI (others keep doing it). We studied existing facial recognition technologies, already widely used by companies and...

sdfordham: Did you read the W&K paper? Could you please explain to me what is so unambiguously unethical about it? Developing facial recognition tech that can do it is extremely...

@villasv Thank you for your thoughtful response. As we write in the fragment you cite, physiognomy was based on unscientific studies, superstition, anecdotal evidence, and racist pseudo-theories. Yet this does...

@villasv I am not sure if I got the the second criticism raised in your post ("the paper used a gender classifier to define facial femininity. Nowhere it is discussed...

@cestinson the criticisms you refer to seems to come from those that did not read the paper. Have you read it? The paper does not jump to such conclusions. The...