I sanity-checked it with two headshots of the same third party and it swung ~2.5 points, so it seems to capture state (lighting/angle/expression) more than trait.
Then I uploaded my own photo and got an unexpectedly high score, which conclusively validates the model and my rigorous n=2 study.
I can't help but wonder if it's a bit of self-aware humour about "scientific looksmaxing". Symmetry is involved in attractiveness but symmetry alone can only carry you so far.
I made this site where you upload a photo of your face and it ranks your face on a bunch of measurable parameters , and then gives you a final rating based on how close your features are to the ideal face. There is also a public leaderboard.
This went kind of viral at my uni when i launched it, like over a 1000 people have gotten their ratings and people seem so exicted to see where there friends rank etc. curious to see what y'all think
The top-ranks on the leaderboard has me convinced this is a poor predictor of actual attractiveness to actual humans. You should have an option to privately rate a photo and not post it publicly. Seems like a big oversight.
But, history has shown that people love to see how they rank up.
Historically, these sort of sites allowed users to rank each other.
Given yours is algorithm based, it'd make sense to give some context as to how the algorithm works... and an example of the 'ideal face' according to the algorithm.
I sanity-checked it with two headshots of the same third party and it swung ~2.5 points, so it seems to capture state (lighting/angle/expression) more than trait. Then I uploaded my own photo and got an unexpectedly high score, which conclusively validates the model and my rigorous n=2 study.
The people at the top of the leaderboard aren't particularly attractive in my opinion.
I can't help but wonder if it's a bit of self-aware humour about "scientific looksmaxing". Symmetry is involved in attractiveness but symmetry alone can only carry you so far.
i think someone's already hacked the website
I made the same mistake when I vibecoded something for ShowHN and it was hacked within the hour lol
Those are added by the author themselves. Scrub the test data perhaps?
That's a nice way to put it.
I made this site where you upload a photo of your face and it ranks your face on a bunch of measurable parameters , and then gives you a final rating based on how close your features are to the ideal face. There is also a public leaderboard. This went kind of viral at my uni when i launched it, like over a 1000 people have gotten their ratings and people seem so exicted to see where there friends rank etc. curious to see what y'all think
The top-ranks on the leaderboard has me convinced this is a poor predictor of actual attractiveness to actual humans. You should have an option to privately rate a photo and not post it publicly. Seems like a big oversight.
lol, yikes, yeah at least start with a hot-or-not baseline as a sanity test.
This is fascinating... I am curious, are any concerns with the algorithm being raised? Or are people blindly accepting their ranking?
hot or not is back.
I think the algorithm is janky based on the list.
But, history has shown that people love to see how they rank up.
Historically, these sort of sites allowed users to rank each other.
Given yours is algorithm based, it'd make sense to give some context as to how the algorithm works... and an example of the 'ideal face' according to the algorithm.