Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login
How Normal Am I? (hownormalami.eu)
393 points by innot on Oct 1, 2020 | hide | past | favorite | 208 comments

Ah, this one couldn't find my face. It kept focusing on my left ear and gave it a 5 for attractiveness. Then it couldn't find my face any longer. There was another fun one posted here months ago [1].

I wanna say I'm disappointed, but I'd be lying. I'm happy that A.I. cannot detect us black people. I'll need to do something about that left ear though.

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21337863

The only person I know who did something about his left ear, did admirable. Just don’t wrap the ear in a newspaper and hand it to a prostitute, as I doubt that sort of thing will work out well in these modern times.

Before googling: Is this a van Gogh reference?

After googling: Yep, that's a van Gogh reference.


> Vincent took the ear and wrapped it in newspaper. With a hat pulled down over his wound, he, with ear in hand, left the house to go to a “maison de tolerance”, a brothel close to the house. There he asked for a girl named Rachel who he gave the ear to saying “Guard this object carefully.”

Whatever drugs he was taking, I want them

It was just that he had forgotten that she had invited him, and it was a Sunday and all the gift shops were closed...

Of course, that makes it totally acceptable now haha

I don't think it worked out well in his times either

It's okay, the wall in front of me scored 6.4, was a 14 year old male with a BMI of 36.1, and had a happy reaction to a dog.

I'm not black, but have a beard and I got the same results as you. I want to say maybe this algorithm needs some work.

Burkas, beards and sunglasses are the natural predators of facial recognition algorithms.

I think the crowd sourced "am I hot or not" did a better job.

Maybe someone can enlighten me. I first heard about this problem 10 years ago. I'm sure it's been known far longer.

Is there some extremely difficult algorithmic problem preventing these systems from working on people with darker skin?

I had presumed it was a long corrected oversight but it still appears to be a problem.

Even photographic cameras have difficulty with exposure for dark skin. This is a problem as old as photography.

So the deltas are narrower creating a breakdown in the SNR for say edge detection?

Please excuse me if this is totally wrong and I sound ignorant, I assure you I am...

I have a big beard and thick black framed glasses, often image recognition can't find my face either. And I'm also happy about it. :)

I'm extremely nearsighted so through the glasses my face looks smaller than it actually is. The outlines of my face are shifted.

Whenever my gfs daughter wanted to play with snapchat and me I had to take off the glasses for it to work.

TL/DR; it's a off-hand joke.

Cannot decide if I should respond with a meme reference to Samual L. Jackson asking "Does he look like a *?" or ask "Do you also cook? Do you have a deep voice? Are we only used to seeing your torso and your hands? Do you have a popular YouTube show?"

But frankly, that's interesting the accommodation you have to make for an algorithm to play with your daughter. I wonder what other accommodations people make in life because of algorithms.

It started with 5, then I kept getting closer to the camera until it was at 7.5 ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I started with 5, and got up to 6 by angling my head down and to the right and raising my left eyebrow.

Its probably focusing on a single part of your skin.

Hmmm.. this is not a new thing...


According to this AI I am about as attractive as your ear.

I kinda wanna see your ear now.

HN: "delete Facebook"

Also HN: "show your face to this random site so an algorithm can tell you if you're hot or not"

I mean, it's an EU-funded academic site designed to raise awareness of privacy issues, so I'm inclined to believe them when they say they aren't keeping any of this data.

Maybe it's because programmers tend to think categorically, but I find HN frequently has this problem where people are freaking out like "why is it okay when Mozilla does X but you don't want Google to do X?!" as though we're supposed to treat every question as some sort of sui generis scenario divorced from all history and context.

History matters, context matters. I (generally) trust academics and democratically-elected governments, and I (generally) distrust giant ad-tech companies and authoritarian states.

Context mattering has nothing to do with sharing your face with a random site that claims to be supported by "The EU".

This is a site made by one guy, not the EU.

Creator here.

The project was created as part of my role as artist within the Sherpa consortium. It's a Horizon2020 research project whose goal is to figure out what Europeans believe are the biggest issues around AI that we'll experience in 2025. Most of the other partners are universities, and I'm the lucky one who gets to translate what we learn into art pieces.

Learn more about Sherpa here: https://www.project-sherpa.eu/

All the other works I've created / am creating for Sherpa can be found here: https://www.sherpapieces.eu/

Besides working as an artist I also work as a privacy designer, which means I specialise in creating things/products that protect privacy.

This website was a very cool challenge to build, a testament to the power of javascript.

I followed a link to socialcooling.com as well the other day. The things you are talking about are critical for a decent civilisation moving forward. Thank you for talking about them and making us think.

This is really cool work! If somebody else wanted to get involved in working on projects like these, how would you suggest getting started?

That's difficult to say. You could start with getting to to know an issue and specialising in it. Reading books from academic writers (not the stuff sold at airport bookstores). Read Slashdot. Once you've got a grasp, think about how you could translate what you learnt so that your mom would understand it. Think about what your mom likes: quizes, human-interest stories. Lighthearted stuff. Then create your own translation.

It's probably easiest to connect with a local group of people who care about these issues.

Where do the algorithms come from?

The main one is FaceApiJS.

One I trained myself (BMI), and the others I just scavenged from existing Github projects. So with most of these I don't know how they were trained, what photos they were fed, etc.

How accurate is the BMI estimator? I trained one years ago, but the performance wasn't great.

Then I guess it says something negative about today's internet that I trust some random guy a lot more than I trust Facebook or Google and their hordes of lawyers. If he says he's not collecting my data, I'm inclined to believe him. If Google says they won't misuse my data, I assume that comes with 200 pages of legalese loopholes to let them do whatever they want.

I don't think I'm wrong, either.

I hate that I have to feel agreement with this.

Edit {

Also, for those who are really concerned, I did test going to the landing page and disconnecting from the internet.

It still worked, which leads me to believe the creator was in fact telling the truth.


Also, the EU is far from being this "digital warrior" some claim to be.

Grad students working on Deep learning projects need to get data from somewhere.

Putting all those images on a pillory on some marketplaces would certainly raise awareness for privacy.

When they asked for webcam permission I instinctively checked to make sure my webcam was unplugged. Having an algorithm compliment your face is like having a horoscope tell you "You're loyal to fault and you're the kind of person that has tons of friends but you value your closest relationships the most..." etc.

It didn't compliment my face!

I thought the same. I read the TOS, they said it was all local, so I let the page load and then disconnected internet.

It didn't seem to cause any problems.

So? A site like this could still send data when internet is on. Or the code could change at a later date.

Technically. But as a European I'd already be in a lot of trouble for breaking the law, since the website promises to not collect personal data.

What you can do is check the javascript code for any 'http'. So open https://www.hownormalami.eu/main.js and then do CTRL-F and type in 'http'. See if any of the things you find seem to call home. Also scan over the code visually to check for any obfuscated code patterns which could hide additional instances of data transmission. In this case you won't find any shenanigans.

In general I applaud your critical stance.

I was more referring to the fact that it's possible to use it completely offline after the initial load, allowing you to use the app without risking any data leaving your machine.

That being said, I did talk to the author a little bit, and am inclined to trust him.

The Joke is the line that says:

"Read terms: NO - Normal (88%)"

Gave me a chuckle.

We are so used to shitty TOS, cookie banners and all kinds of BS that we learned to just click them away.

I don't click TOS's away not because I am used to them, but because I decided they are not worth my time (based on their length and abundance, how I value my time and what I gain from reading them).

In makes me a bit angry sometimes, you must often confirm you READ it, but it is undoable. They really don't expect you to either, because if they would, they'd be saying their service would really only be used by people reading their entire TOS, which would be too small a crowd to base your business on.

Of course tosdr.org is an interesting alternative and as far as cookie banners are confirmed I truly am finding myself conditioned click them away asap.

> you must often confirm you READ it, but it is undoable

If they actually wanted you to read it, they wouldn't present 50kb of text in a tiny font on a phone screen and give you an 'accept' button at the top (much less give you a 'view' and 'accept' button where the former leads to the 50kb of tiny text and the latter just glosses over the whole affair.)

I did read the TOS, but I have cookies disabled so it still said NO. I suspect that most of the people who do read the TOS probably also have cookies disabled, and therefore also were not counted.

That's very strange. It doesn't use cookies at all. I know because I built it :-)

How unusual. I did follow the link from the TOS to the application.

Would you like me to try again/do anything else to help debug?

Edit: turning on noprocrast because I have work to get done. I'll check back in an hour or so.

That would be great actually. I've enabled debug mode. Add ?debug to the end of the url to get a peak under the engine. So:


I went and took another look, it turns out it did work properly, it was just that I read the UI wrong the first time.

Sorry for the false alarm, I should've done better checking first.

Edit: See other comment

Scratch that.

I was able to reproduce the error, it happens when you open the "Terms and Conditions" in a new tab and then click through to the app from there.

Ah, so that's it! Thanks!

Can confirm.

I read the TOS too. I have first party cookies enabled, but I also said no to agreeing to include my data in the dataset. I suspect there's a selection bias of one kind of other in the TOS piece. Probably correlates with other fields too!

Thought the same myself. I am not that old, but still optimistic about the challenge of never uploading an image of myself to the net. I am on pics uploaded by others sadly.

Apperantly when the website thinks you are a woman, it marks that column down as "Normal: No", because 82% of visitors are men.

Just something to think about.

Also it called me ugly :<


I just ran the website for a second time and didn't change my clothes or anything, and it gave me very different results.

ie. gender, age, bmi, attractiveness all different.

I don't think the ratings for this is very stable & reproducible.

at least it rated my girlfriend as abnormally attractive. :)

Age and gender are derived using the FaceApiJS project. In my own experience it's doesn't vary as wildly if you're a white male. With other ethnicities the predictability levels can drop, especially if you're Asian.

Hey it's you! You wrote social cooling too, which I really enjoyed.

Great site. Thank you for sharing it.

You're very welcome.

I think this is entirely the point - to highlight how these algorithms are used in every day life, and how unreliable they are.

It points it out by "raising your eyebrows to make it think you're less fat" and "move your head around to change your age".

> I don't think the ratings for this is very stable & reproducible.

I think that's part of the point though -- the claim is that these are being used, regardless of how predictable they are.

What was the beauty score for that? Number wise. The scale is huge!

What a great website and cool way to present a technical topic. Online education is still in its infancy and when we talk nowadays about good examples of online education, we usually think of videos and (in the best case) of websites where students can play with interactive models, solve exercises, etc. But this website demonstrates that you can still go mucher further in involving the listener as a person.

This of course requires an enormous effort in the preparation of the material.

I second this. I've just spent the summer putting together an online experiment for a student along similar lines:

https://www.doesmyrobotunderstand.me/ (please, feel free! We need subjects...)

I wish I'd known about the Javascript face analysis beforehand! And also how hard it would be to learn Javascript ;) And how to do that cool embedded video thing.

The immediate feedback about how I did is nice, but also may pollute the data in a way. Once I got it right, I new to retry a very similar expression for the next 1-2 tries. But then, most people might actually know how to make human expressions naturally. Personally, I appreciated this as a tool to help me learn how to human. :-)

Agreed. I found the presentation of the material more interesting and innovative than the topic itself.

That was simply amazing. Having the video guide you through all the machine learning prediction steps as they got analyzed on your video feed worked flawless, both in terms of technical execution but also presentatio nwise.

They also made some great points about how ridiculous some of these algorithms are (shake your head to lose 10 years of age, or just trying to predict BMI from a face photo)

And I was surprised to know that this has made its way into hiring! So, the job hunt is going to get even more superfluous? Really reminds me of that Episode in Black Mirror, where everything depends on your rating..

Apparently I lied about my age, it predicts that I'm actually 8 years younger than I am which is fun.

It also tells me my BMI is about 9 points lower than reality which is also fun.

And that I've got as long left to live as I have lived already which is pretty awesome.

But it also tells me I'm ugly, which isn't so much fun :P

At least it correctly identified me as a man with 97% certainty. So I can stop worrying about that now :D

Same here. While I know that I look younger than I'm - once many people assumed that I'm 10 years younger. So it is quite cool to fool algorithm too.

As well algorithm thinks that I'm quite ugly. Well, I don't care even if algorithm is right, as algorithm is not my second wife.

It said I was 16 years younger than I am. Which is nice.

Yea, the AI didn't think I was attractive either, although I take care of my appearance :/

Yeah the data-gathering-AI-stuff is cool & creepy but I'm actually more interested in the UX of the site.

Forget buttons, dialogs, beautifully designed pages. Future UIs should have videos of a person talking telling you what is happening and what to do next!

> Future UIs should have videos of a person talking telling you what is happening and what to do next!

Only if those who want to can turn it off and get text. It works in this context, but most contexts I'm going to guess it would be more rather than less frustrating.


I mean for all we know the guy could have been a deepfake

Some fun easter eggs in this. For example, if you click the little EU flag at the bottom, it marks you as "Curious: Yes".

Also chuckled when I came closer to the camera when prompted, and it labeled me as a "Good boy"...

"Violently average" oof

Great website to share with my non-tech friends and family, they're tired of my rants but this is very well articulated.

Any chances of including other languages for wider reach?

It linked to the Dutch version at the end (the author is Dutch, judging by their name and accent): https://www.hoenormaalbenik.nl

I pointed my camera at my monitor and brought up conventionally attractive celebrities.

No one got higher than 6.2.

    Zac Efron: 6.2
    Henry Cavill: 5.9
    Pierce Brosnan: 5.1
    Shemar Moore: 4.7

I got 6.9 (7.0 without glasses) -- definitely not more attractive than any of those guys. Even my mother would say Henry Cavill is considerably more attractive than me without batting an eyelid.

I would imagine there is some sort of penalty given the face is on a 2D surface.

Well Henry Cavill is a pretty high bar to be fair.

Since your screen is most likely flat, you'd have to hold the camera directed straight at it and at a bit of a distance in order for their face not to get distorted by perspective. Even a slight angle would make it appear to the algorithm that they have too big of a forehead/chin, or an asymmetric face (otherwise known as a 5/10).

Well then that's comforting (for me)

My 6.7 really shines in comparison... Maybe I should take up acting

I guess I should apply to some modelling jobs with my 9.4 then!

When I saw the headline I thought maybe it was an essay about how to think about your own mental state, which would have been super interesting to me – I'm desperate to know whether the little goblins running around in my head are part of the human condition or are my own customized baggage – but alas, they juts wanna tell me if I'm hot, which I already know the answer to.

I didn't give it access to my camera but it sounds like it's giving "attractiveness" ratings, but jeez, that's super complex. I imagine this thing is measuring symmetry and proportion, but that'll only get you so far; the "hottest" A-list actors usually have a kind of wabi-sabi quality, with oversized teeth, or an interestingly shaped nose, or a crooked smile. There are also obviously all kinds of attractive, and emotional baggage that factors into what's attractive to people (they're reminded of a parent or childhood crush, etc.)

The most interesting attractiveness-measurer I ever saw was a subreddit where you'd post your own photo, and members of the community would post photos of people who are equal to your own attractiveness, so it effectively threw ego out of the equation.

Do you remember the name of that subreddit, by any chance?

/r/EqualAttraction seems to be it (I just searched for 'similar attractiveness' on reddit, was the third or fourth result). Now my problem is I don't know any of the celebrities they are naming, so I'll have to google around to see if I agree with the commenters.

I'm pretty sure that was it – when I saw it years ago, there were a few posts that were pretty remarkable, in that somebody "average" looking had uploaded a picture, and someone else would upload a pretty good (non-celeb) match, and in most cases the op would say, "Oh, that's way better than I thought!"

Looking at it now, however, it seems like it's mostly a "what celeb do I vaguely resemble" thread, which isn't nearly as interesting.

The AI rated me a 4 out of 10 and struggled to figure out whether I was a man or a woman. There goes my self esteem for the day.

You're in good company: The app gave Henry Cavill 5.9 and Pierce Brosnan 5.1 in my testing.

Just shining my phone's flashlight to my face increase the score by 1 point. Maybe try with a better lighting? You might get a 10 score ;)

I was surprised to see without wearing any makeup that it was 93% sure I'm a woman, considering that I'm a trans woman.

Although, it did say I'm 16 with a BMI of 18.3, which is a huge undershot. There's no way I lost 45 pounds since I last weighed myself.

This app underestimated my age by a decade. I'm flattered. It almost matches with how old I feel I am.

It underestimated my age by 5 years, and my BMI by 5!

The app told me I'm between 16 and 36 years old.

I'm 46, it guessed 34. Yay.

Can't switch to front camera on pixel 3a?

Yikes. I'll look into it. I take it you tried the button in the top-left to switch?

Were you able to select the other camera if you reloaded the page?

The same in Firefox on Samsung Galaxy A40, Firefox version is 81.1.1 (Build #2015764547). I missed the puppy because of that.

Same with Firefox and Chrome on Pixel xl

Same problem for me on a pixel 3.

Ditto on Huawei Mate 20 X

The whole walkthrough was very incredibly well done

So apparently the algorithms say I'm almost 10 years younger than I actually am (late 20s, algos say I'm just about to get my student driver's license).

I wanted to see how much the camera quality affects these scores so I wanted to try on mobile but I can't get it to switch to the front camera.

If you are on Android then you can try firefox mobile. It allowed me to select which camera to use.

That life expectancy feature scared the crap out of me until i realized it thought i was in Russia..

Nice! 8.5 attractive and looking 10 years younger. Time to ask for a raise at my company! Oh wait!

I’m apparently a decently attractive (6.6) 14-year-old (I’m 34). I came closer to the cam, but it didn’t detect me doing it.

edit: And my wife actually got recognized despite being black. But it decided she’s ugly (3.4) and has no idea how old she is ;)

Nice project :) Too bad it doesn't say how old it thinks you are though (or I missed it) All I know now is that it thinks I lied about my age, which I didn't.

I'm just going to assume I look like I'm 20

67% normal

abnormally young, which is a normal observation by others of me.

The life expectancy is probably fair even though

BMI is just about right, 19.6

Am not a good boy :-D

This is fascinating and I also approve of the cause and message. Yet more reasons to have a simple camera cover.

Was that a hoax? It started showing me pictures of dogs in shower caps for some reason, said it was loading and unloading random data sets, then began quizzing me about random things.

Creator here. It sounds like the main face detection algorithm (faceApiJS) wasn't able to load somehow. Then it will just try to keep you entertained by spouting funny loading sentences.

Try refreshing the page, or using a different browser.

BTW site crashes on Firefox.

The interaction heat map blocks the Skip button. I just wanted to see the score so I skipped all the talk but that also meant that my skipping made me unable to skip after that step.

The results were predictably "AI" = complete rubbish. Even though I'm a white male.

Our brave new world of "computer said so"…

Great presentation though, kudos!

So then the issue is who has this data, because algorithms are increasingly becoming commodity. Right now the biggest databases are superpowers, big tech , and ordinary countries. One way to remove the competitive advantage of any good or bad actor, is to make the data commonplace, in order to render it worthless, in order to remove the incentive for so much spying.

Not sure if you're being sarcastic, but this reads to me like "if surveillance doesn't produce a worthwhile society, you're just not using enough of it."

Honestly , i think it's going to get worse before it gets better. People don't see the invisible hand of surveillance at the moment , so they don't push back.

My attractiveness dropped 2 points when I put my glasses on.

Interestingly enough no other metrics were affected by wearing glasses.

BMI was way off but the metric itself is such a crude generalization so this is probably excusable.

Mine was predicted much lower than it really is, but I'm lean with big muscles, so that is to be expected, I suppose.

Exactly! My real BMI is 25, and just like you, I am on the muscular side. The estimate was 19.

You may enjoy this blogpost I made that goes into how the BMI prediction algorithm was developed. It's the only one in the project that I trained myself.


Like you said, muscles matter quite a bit. It's attractive to use photos af athletes to train the algorithm, because there are a lot of websites that show their photos along with their weight and height (which you need to calculate a BMI). But since muscles weigh so much more than fat, athletes have high BMI with slim bodies, which warps the algorithm.

I didn't use athletes for this reason (it's trained on a diet of 50% Chinese celebrities and 50% American arrest records). But I found projects that do use these photos.

My BMI is 25.2 and the webpage calculated 25.1.

It would have been interesting to see some summary statistics for each of the predictions.

This website doesn't work at all for me (Safari, iOS 13). After asking for permission the video becomes modal and impossible to close, completely hijacking my browser and forcing me to quit the app. That's the state of JS in 2020 I guess.

oh, thanks for bringing that to my attention, I'll look into it.

The average beauty score ranges from something like -150000 to +150000. Not sure why!

I suspect someone has tried to manipulate their score. I found one database entry that had only an extreme beauty score. I've hardened the system against this now.

I did it twice. Once with the internal camera in my laptop (Lenovo Carbon X1 Extreme sport 4x4 Cargo edition) Received a 67%.

Second time with an external Logitech HD 1080p Received a 83%.

I am apparently much more attractive and much thinner in HD.

I'm in my late twenties but people always think I'm around like 21 or something, I was very surprised to see that this site also guessed that I was about 22, I would expect a computer to see through that.

> I would expect a computer to see through that.

If you actually look like you're 21, then how is an AI supposed to "see through that", when all it has is an image of your face?

I got 7.9 for beauty index which was pretty surprising. I wonder what is the exact average over the whole sample? And who got the 8+ marks? The distribution would definitely be interesting to see.

Even though they say the range is 0-10, I got 10.1 the first time, and 8.7 the second.

People say I look like Jesus (the "Europeanized" version).

I was around 5, repositioned my webcam because it/my face was askew, and I shot up to 8.7! While I am flattered, experience certainly does not match that number.

On the other hand, my life expectancy is in the 60's, despite having a normal BMI.

I had same experience with life expectancy. I think the major factor in it is country of origin.

I guess you're not actually asking, but I got 9.3.

I think the link to the Sherpa Project is wrong. It should be https://www.project-sherpa.eu/

You're right! Thanks, I've fixed it!

Accuracy side, I thought the presentation was excellent! I really like the explanation playing while the analysis is taking place. I’m totally going to steal this presentation idea.

top left switch to front camera didn't work in my chromium browser on Android

beauty 6-8

BMI very vague 19-25 anyone could guess

it says i lied about age because I chose the two year higher instead of 3 years younger

Just moving my lamp around (i.e., making my face whiter, I'm guessing?) could add 2-3 points. Putting on glasses could do the same. Not sure what to make of this.

I somehow managed to get an 11 for the attractiveness. I could take it as a huge compliment, but I'm quite sure there was a bug

I'm caught between being fascinated by this technology and horrified at the thought of how much it is in use already.

I was able to increase my attractiveness from 6 to 8 just by doing the Kubrick Stare. Is this what women really want?

Interestingly it guessed my BMI at 38. To get to that number for my height I would have to be twice my current weight.

Yeah, if you train a model with pictures of the same person, or maybe their family, you may be able to guess the BMI from the face, after all, the face stores fat in a non linear way.

But I remember back in college a friend was severely overweight and eventually he was motivated to lose weight. Diet and exercise details aside, in a couple of years he became a BMI 28, but very low fat, ripped and chiseled muscled up individual. But interestingly, he mostly kept his fat person face, those cheeks, while they shrank, weren't going away.

That is just awesome, thanks for sharing this ! Forwarded it to all my colleagues and comparing rates just now

This is such a flattering website:

* 5.5 with glasses, 7.5 without. Glad I wear contacts, I guess.

* Age predicted: 20, truth: 30+

* BMI predicted: 18.7, truth: 22

This was their plan all along. To harvest the data people leave in the comments. Cunningham's Law in effect ;)

Hahaha. I'm a sucker!

It guessed my age as 15 years younger than I actually am and then accused me of lying about my age.


Huh, it seems to rate me 8 out of 10. Only if people in real life shared the same opinion ;_;

No-one likes a boaster.

7.5/10 here btw. :D

the only data I reported was my age... and it had some big misses, like BMI being much less than it really is just because of beard. Also it said my life expentancy is going to be up to 81 years old, when in reality I will live forever :')

Well that was an unexpected compliment — thanks to a bug in the algorithm I got 11.2.

This says I look 15 years younger (thanks) and am '50% Normal ' (thanks?)

Why the F would anyone on HN want to give their face to a random website.

Not hotdog

You can't even define normal, how come you think your program can?

That's the point of the website. To show how govs an companies use AI to try and classify you are normal or not.

Average would be a more appropriate word, but that doesn't make for as interesting of a hashtag

> Access to your camera is necessary, but no personal data is collected.


4/10. I mean I knew I was ugly but still didn't feel good.

I'm sad and ugly :(

Very interesting, but hangs at the last(?) step (life expectancy)

Could they be trying to make a point? About insurance abuses of this technology maybe? maybe not, could just be the algorithm failing. Or maybe they don't want to assume the liability of actually providing a number.

No, it's a javascript error. The second time around I agreed to the terms and conditions and then the site worked fine.

Yikes. Thanks, I'll look into it. The terms and conditions have no influence on this, but it could that that one of the scores required to create the life expectancy prediction is missing (age, gender, bmi, country).

My life expectancy was the only score that it didn't give me. It just stayed at ... and then marked that as not normal

I found the issue, and it should hopefully be fixed. It happened if your IP address couldn't be used to predict your location.

Does it fall back to US if the IP address can't be used? Because this would be the first time a GeoIP database would move my EU IP address to the US...

Yes you are correct.

It looks like they're trying to guess at your life expectancy through your country, which they're guessing at using your IP address, which they can only get at if you agreed to the terms and conditions

It gave me 30 years minimum, while I'm not yet 22 :-D

TIL I am ugly. :/

y’all really still wanna play with stuff like this?

>"Violently average"

.. neither validated nor insulted.

Interesting, it couldn't detect my face.

Well turns out my grandma wasn't lying.

yikes! I seems to think I only have 20 years left to live. I'm only in my mid 40's

Meanwhile, I'm going to live to be 120! Boy am I glad I visited this site!

Tell me more about your other stats, I want to be like this. What should I focus on? My body mass lolz.

You need to move to a country with long life-expectancy. I am from Ukraine, so it has given pretty average life-expectancy for it ~69 years.

impossible to use on my iphone


Read terms? Yes

Others: No (88%)

hm that is not good at all!

I read the terms, but didn't click the confirmation, and got 'No' as 'Read terms' - so I think it's tracking the confirmation checkbox.

Actually, the checkbox does nothing. It's just for show :-)

I didn't scroll down on the T&Cs did I ? :)

Ctrl+f'd "terms"...unpleasantly surprised that no one else in the thread seems to have got this result :)

If I wanted to be told that I'm ugly, old and fat, I would have just asked my siblings

I am Mr.MomsPrecious1... I'm not sure if I should feel insulted....

it said i was an uggo =[


Terms and conditions

This is an art project by Tijmen Schep that shows how face detection algoritms are increasingly used to judge you.

No personal data is sent to our server in any way. Nothing. Zilch. Nada. All the face detection algorithms will run on your own computer, in the browser.

In this 'test' your face is compared with that of all the the other people who have previously done this test. At the end of the show you can, if you want to, share some anonimized data. That will then be used to re-calculate the new average. That anonymous data is not shared any further.

I share your concern and decided to not try the website. The site said no personal data is collected, and if we opt to share our data, it would be anonimized. Well yeah, but how about browser fingerprint? is that considered as a personal data? or if it's collected at all?

edit: Okay, I succumbed to my curiosity and decided to try it but with all my connection turned off. As far as my obeservation goes, at least there are no ajax call from this site and everything is functioning even without connection.

Is a picture without personally identifying information problematic? I assume pre-COVID you didn't walk around in a mask all the time.

I wonder how many people who actually upload a photo to this site will even bother to remove EXIF data?

If you have all the original metadata in a typical smartphone camera JPEG, then things like the info below is available:

- camera model

- phone model

- time & date of when the picture was taken

- geo-location of where the picture was taken

I would say for anyone motivated enough that is pretty easily identifiable.

edit: bullet points formatting

edit2: lewispollard rightly pointed out that I should read before writing. :)

It uses a live feed from your camera, not a photo.

I don't trust elites or any product which quickly gets popular on any form of mainstream media. There is so much dirty money flowing around and most of it goes to lying psychopaths (the selection bias for psychopathy is systemic and seemingly intentional). Our modern economic growth is founded on coercing people into continuing to accept currencies which keep getting dirtier and which keep losing their value. It's 100% about coercion, manipulation and gate keeping. If you can't figure out what the product is that they're selling, you're the product.

Did you know that online communities are often comprised of multiple people that will act differently?

You will not find these on mainstream media. They will not be promoted.

99% of the cases i would agree with you,I don't even buy laptops with integrated webcams for this very reason; However, websites with the .eu domain are subject to EU laws (obviously, since you need to be an eu citizen to have such a domain).

Even though i'm not an EU fan (far from it actually),it would be very weird if they'd have such a website and then not comply with data requests for deletion/download, especially when they boast about it being an EU-funded website that respects privacy.

This is correct. .EU domain registration have several restrictions on them, one of which is full disclosure of who you are. I would trust a .eu website, over a .com anyday.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact