Jump to content

Welcome to FutureTimeline.forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!

These ads will disappear if you register on the forum

Photo

Idea for AI: Program that automatically removes the beer goggles.


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
18 replies to this topic

#1
bgates276

bgates276

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 415 posts

I was thinking, you know it's cool how AI can be used to modify existing images. Another thought I've had is that it's too bad men can't get a more realistic appraisal of what women actually look like, without them deceiving us with all their makeup and accessories. This is particularly true when they are 'striking a pose' on dating sites and what not. 

 

Then it hit me. Wouldn't it be cool if there was a computer program, that automatically scanned pictures of females on websites, perhaps on dating ones, used artificial intelligence, and then recreated the image for us, of what they actually look like, without all the makeup or other tricks. Another idea, would be if AI could make an educated guess, and predict what they would look like in 5, 10 or 15 years from the current picture, and include other variables into the equation, such as if they were smokers or not, or had a poor diet. 

 

I think the unfortunate reality of such a program, would be that everyone would stop dating.  :onthequiet:

 

What do you guys think?



#2
Voight-Kampff

Voight-Kampff

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 28 posts

I think if you're worried about what a woman will look like in 5 years then you shouldn't be dating. Females are both biologically and psychologically focused on bearing children, not as much on sex or looks or money, which means that women are looking for long-term mates to raise their children. Men are looking for something somewhat different than what women are looking for, which gives rise to inevitable friction for any given couple.

I think what would be much more useful would be a program that captures the essence of what a given male user finds attractive in a woman, and then automatically searches for women whose photos closely match that ideal.

I also think that AI isn't needed for any of this, only a statistical program combined with a face feature extraction component.



#3
bgates276

bgates276

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 415 posts

Hmm, you changed it from what men want, namely a physically attractive woman,  to what women want. Why is it always about what they want? The program would be marketed for men, not women. And yes, physical attractiveness is usually an indicator of the ability to bear healthy offspring, so don't even go there.

 

Women have all these demands, but if what men perceive what a woman brings to the table, is based on false pretenses, can it really be a fair exchange? An AI which shows a woman how she actually is, and what she will be like, would even the playing field. Perhaps this would be a threat to a lot of women, because maybe the truth isn't on their side, and they don't really have much to offer after all. 



#4
Voight-Kampff

Voight-Kampff

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 28 posts

Hmm, you changed it from what men want, namely a physically attractive woman,  to what women want. Why is it always about what they want?

 

Because if you don't give a woman what she wants, she isn't going to stay with you very long.

One of my biggest frustrations with dating was that the ladies I wanted the most weren't interested in me. It should be clear this is a universal phenomenon by considering how many men would do almost anything to get a date with any given famous actress they like, yet clearly such actresses aren't going to date all those millions of men who like them, and in fact those actresses won't even be remotely interested in most of those men. It's like most any other pairing phenomenon: Just because you want to live in somebody's house doesn't mean the owners are willing to sell it to you. Just because you want to get into an ivy league college doesn't mean that college is willing to accept you. Just because you want to pet a cat doesn't mean that cat wants to be petted. Etc. Such pairings are asymmetrical. People are more complicated than magnets or hydrogen atoms.



#5
bgates276

bgates276

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 415 posts

Okay, so maybe in the current environment, the ball is in their court. Perhaps because they have been made 'equal'; which means that they have been given the same outcomes in terms of economic status, largely through government handouts in one way or another, but have retained their sexual value, making them in essence, superior to men. However, all this means is that because it is no longer a good deal for men, men and women simply arn't hooking up that much, because the man isn't really getting a whole lot out of it, even if he tries. 

 

This isn't sustainable though. There will come a time, perhaps when the government goes bankrupt, when women will no longer have a choice. At that point in time, men will control sex, if the women want food or protection, and a program such as the above will become quite useful. 



#6
Voight-Kampff

Voight-Kampff

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 28 posts

However, all this means is that because it is no longer a good deal for men, men and women simply arn't hooking up that much, because the man isn't really getting a whole lot out of it, even if he tries. 

 

No kidding. I permanently stopped dating in 2013.

If people are just looking for a short-term relationship then compatibility is much simpler: less time for things to go wrong.



#7
Enter Ataraxia

Enter Ataraxia

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 40 posts
  • Location+0° 2′ 46.2″, 179° 56′ 39.4″ 7.9E2+/-420parsecs

My attraction to women has led me astray in many ways from science and learning. While my life still revolves around wonder and a deep enthusiasm for the natural world, it pales in comparison to the pre-pubescent version of myself where that was my entire existence. That need, that want that bores a hole in my heart really does distract me. There are so many females that I have loved but have never fully gained the confidence to ask out on a date. It is sad and begets loneliness. Such biological attraction should not define a person's existence to the extent that it does in real life. To see women without a guise, unfiltered would make little difference in my life. The associativity of women on dating apps with ephemeral relationships is already enough for me to eschew dating sites. Voight-Kampff's idea of a device that matches people based on preference and personality is not a poor one and is one that has been widely considered by many people. A section of Yuval Noah Harari's book Homo deus discusses this prospect thoroughly. I would really recommend reading this book. Overall, I do not know what to think of women at the moment. They are quite similar to me in many ways, yet the driving processes behind their thoughts and motivations may deviate. I believe that if I were to loss all sexual interest but retain testosterone and other similar hormones it would feel like waking up into a new world where I was driven solely towards advancing civilization. What are your thoughts for if you still had equal drive and vitality for life and work but not for sex?


"Utopia is the hope that the scattered fragments of good that we come across from time to time in our lives can be put together, one day, to reveal the shape of a new kind of life. The kind of life that yours should have been." - Bostrom

 


#8
bgates276

bgates276

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 415 posts

You know, it's interesting. It is actually women, as people, that turns me off of them the most. Unfortunately, I think it is the physical attraction that lures most men in the first place. The fact that women deceive men with makeup, is only just the beginning of the treachery.

 

And yes, Enter Ataraxia, men would accomplish so much if they put their drive into science, rather than if they spent it chasing women. Regarding reductivism, or in turn, expanding into the universe, I would argue that  the knowledge you can gain from science is virtually infinite. To be fair, I think a part of the problem lies within men ourselves. We often chase women when we have lost a sense of anything higher, and are thus given to base desires, even if we are not conscious of this fact. 

 

With women, you can pre-occupy yourself with trying to understand their mystery, only to come to the conclusion, years later, that the secret was that there really was no secret. They act like they are concealing something, and don't get me wrong, they could be, but I can assure you it is never anything positive. Women actually represent the finite, and are superficial in almost every way. The problem is that men are deep thinkers, and we assumed there had to be something more to them than there actually is.  



#9
Voight-Kampff

Voight-Kampff

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 28 posts

Both of you guys are right on target, at least from what I've experienced regarding women.

 

Before I hit puberty I was living in sort of a dream world. Until then my highest ideals were enjoying atmospheres (e.g., the tropical beach atmosphere of palm trees, coral reefs, fish nets, sea shells, etc.), advancing humanity (especially through science), having close friends and family, and maybe some religious ideal that no one could describe to me clearly enough that I could clearly and directly pursue it for myself. My happiest moments at that phase of my life were trips to the beach (especially with girls), going on school field trips to oceanographic places, and watching underwater movies. I had some extremely happy times in that phase of life, though. After puberty females became about 50% of my life. They brought me the biggest highs--incredible emotional highs, higher than in pre-puberty--but also the biggest lows--depression so bad that I wondered if suicide would be better. This is actually typical of adolescence, from what I've read: big highs with big lows. After about my third heart break, that one in adulthood, I wished I had never even met that last lady: the emotional pain from the breakup was so bad that it could never be compensated by anything we had done or could ever do together. I did still try a few different routes with ladies after that, very cautiously, such as older women, physical relationships only, friendships only, but nothing worked. Finally after more awful experiences, in real life and online, I realized that women are absolutely lost, and that they would never be able to relate to me. I could relate to them, but only if I dumbed myself down by going into 1950s mode of doing nothing more with my life than working a steady job and reproducing. Maybe some men can handle that direction in life, but not I.

 

Where I stand now is I will make one exception with dating if a certain lady from my past becomes available, but no one else. Even that specific lady is objectively deceitful scum, but emotionally I'm still hooked and she was so important in my life that I could overlook the things she did. That relationship might be constrained to a light romance, though, if it ever did happen. Light romance is a compromise and the only way I can see that a long-term relationship is viable for most couples, assuming that there exists any kind of viable couple relationship at all: If you go for a lighter relationship (friendship only), she'll fall in love with someone else and her husband will forbid her to communicate with you. If you go for a heavier relationship (love and babies), it will usually just end in misery for both people. Marriage just doesn't work; the feelings of love are just a biological trick via chemistry to get people feeling committed and having babies, but only for 2-3 years at most. It's a clever biological trick to keep humans reproducing but once you realize it's just a trick, then you realize it's ridiculous and if you fall for it, you still won't be able to keep the lady in many cases after she gets what she wants (children). The last thing the world needs now is more babies, anyway, so what's the point? (Most women either don't look that far ahead, or else do look that far ahead but don't care, as long as they can reproduce as they dreamed of doing ever since they started playing with dolls.) By the way, both ladies I mentioned above got divorced and remarried after they had children. The last one even tried to convince me that she'd *never* get divorced, that that possibility is something her family just doesn't do. Fortunately for me, by then I knew women better than they knew themselves, and my prediction of her divorce--after she cheated on me and married somebody else--came true. For men who get so obsessed with women that ignoring them creates a bigger problem than going with the biological flow, my advice would be the same as the Bibilical advice: better to marry than to burn, but ideally--if you can--leave women alone.

 

I'd absolutely love to experience those ecstatic highs of adolescence again, but now I know it's just not worth it. Love is like using crack: it brings you extreme highs that you could never experience otherwise, but the long-term price is just not worth it. (https://www.youtube....h?v=KAdRPrXdXTU, https://www.youtube....h?v=OtCVLtcfLi4)

 

I hope that helps. Maybe my experiences and conclusions will save some men some years of their lives.


  • Enter Ataraxia likes this

#10
Alislaws

Alislaws

    Democratic Socialist Materialist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,511 posts
  • LocationLondon

On Topic:

The app wouldn't work unless it could figure out everything that had been done to the photo (filters, airbrushing etc.) and to the persons face (makeup, lighting etc.). A "worst case scenario" app could be made that takes key features from a face and fills in the details with "worst case" details. maybe. 

 

People who date women they have only seen in pictures a lot (like tinder users) will end up with pretty good judgment on the accuracy of photos without an app, people who don't do this a lot would benefit from the app, but since they don't really do this sort of thing a lot, they're not a great market.

 

------ 

 

@Bgates267, the fact that you don't like the current reality that women have choices on whether or not to have sex with you is probably a clue as to why none of them want to. If you are right and the day ever comes that civilization collapses and women have to have sex with you or die, don't be too surprised if they choose to take their chances without you, as a modern human man you are probably not any better at survival than the average woman anyway. 

 

@Voight kampff

I'm sorry to hear about these women cheating on you, that really sucks.  I'd like to remind you that women are people, and while some of them may be faithless, others are not, deciding to make generalised judgements about all women/relationships based on a very small sample of women and one man is just a massively flawed methodology. Plenty of marriages work out, my parents has held up well so far, as did my grandparents, if you want some anecdotal examples. 

 

@Enter Ataraxia

I think we could all benefit from a bit more objectivity. We'd probably make much smarter romantic choices if our biology would stop influencing our thinking, (but it wouldn't be as thrilling, I guess?). I'd say remember that women are just people with different sex parts, not particularly different from men, and not somehow all similar to each-other. There may be general trends but plenty of women defy sterotypes and do their own thing. But If you're happier focusing on other goals then more power to you! Many of the greatest scientist in history didn't really bother with romance, sometimes they were literally monks!


  • Jakob, Enter Ataraxia and SemenaMertvykh like this

#11
Voight-Kampff

Voight-Kampff

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 28 posts

 

@Voight kampff

I'd like to remind you that women are people, and while some of them may be faithless, others are not, deciding to make generalised judgements about all women/relationships based on a very small sample of women and one man is just a massively flawed methodology. Plenty of marriages work out, my parents has held up well so far, as did my grandparents, if you want some anecdotal examples. 

 

Ever read "The Mirages of Marriage" (by Lederer & Jackson)? Out of 100 marriages they studied, only one was considered still happy after decades of marriage. Maybe you don't realize how old I am, or how many women I've dated, or how many stories I've heard. You know what percentage of women I've encountered that have major problems with ethics, logic, self-control, or deep understanding of anything? 100%. Not 99% or 99.9%, but 100%. This spans all ages, races, and intelligence levels. I agree that somewhere there must exist a few that don't have major flaws in those attributes, but they're probably either very ugly or else so popular that they can take their pick of men. It's not worth my time to try to find such an exception, especially since she would probably want to have babies, too.



#12
rennerpetey

rennerpetey

    Fighting Corporations since 2020

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 496 posts
  • LocationNot in Kansas anymore

I was thinking, you know it's cool how AI can be used to modify existing images. Another thought I've had is that it's too bad men can't get a more realistic appraisal of what women actually look like, without them deceiving us with all their makeup and accessories. This is particularly true when they are 'striking a pose' on dating sites and what not. 

 

Then it hit me. Wouldn't it be cool if there was a computer program, that automatically scanned pictures of females on websites, perhaps on dating ones, used artificial intelligence, and then recreated the image for us, of what they actually look like, without all the makeup or other tricks. Another idea, would be if AI could make an educated guess, and predict what they would look like in 5, 10 or 15 years from the current picture, and include other variables into the equation, such as if they were smokers or not, or had a poor diet. 

 

I think the unfortunate reality of such a program, would be that everyone would stop dating.  :onthequiet:

 

What do you guys think?

An app of this scope seems about a stone's throw away from an app that just removes anyone's clothes and gives you a picture of them naked.  Congratulations, you have just rendered physical privacy moot.


John Lennon dares you to make sense of this

Spoiler

#13
bgates276

bgates276

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 415 posts

Rennerpetey, I actually thought of that feature after as well. LOL. 



#14
Alislaws

Alislaws

    Democratic Socialist Materialist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,511 posts
  • LocationLondon

 

 

@Voight kampff

I'd like to remind you that women are people, and while some of them may be faithless, others are not, deciding to make generalised judgements about all women/relationships based on a very small sample of women and one man is just a massively flawed methodology. Plenty of marriages work out, my parents has held up well so far, as did my grandparents, if you want some anecdotal examples. 

 

Ever read "The Mirages of Marriage" (by Lederer & Jackson)? Out of 100 marriages they studied, only one was considered still happy after decades of marriage. Maybe you don't realize how old I am, or how many women I've dated, or how many stories I've heard. You know what percentage of women I've encountered that have major problems with ethics, logic, self-control, or deep understanding of anything? 100%. Not 99% or 99.9%, but 100%. This spans all ages, races, and intelligence levels. I agree that somewhere there must exist a few that don't have major flaws in those attributes, but they're probably either very ugly or else so popular that they can take their pick of men. It's not worth my time to try to find such an exception, especially since she would probably want to have babies, too.

Even if you're 100 years old, and have spent your entire life doing nothing but meeting and getting to know women, you still have not met a significant sample of the 3.7 billion women in the world. 

 

I suspect that if you have tried many times and failed every time, maybe the problem is not with "all of the women in the world" or that "happy marriage is a myth" but maybe the problem is with you? Its possible you either have crap taste in women, and are picking women who are horrible people, or you're a terrible boyfriend/husband, and so of course they leave you or cheat on you. 

 

Also just a heads up when you lump 50% of the human race together and start making insulting generalizations you're going to be insulting friends and loved ones of nearly everyone who is reading your post.

 

So on behalf of me and all the women I know who are great people (and fortunately don't read this forum), fuck you very much. 


  • Jakob, rennerpetey, Enter Ataraxia and 1 other like this

#15
bgates276

bgates276

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 415 posts

LOL, Alislaw. Maybe you want to side with women, because you think it gives you brownie points with them. Unfortunately, a woman is NEVER on a man's side. Simply put, they think totally different from men. Women have different brains. For a woman, a man is simply a means to an end. Maybe you are young, maybe you think you are special, and maybe you want to believe in them. Unfortunately, if a man's relationship ever conflicts with her self-interest, she will betray you too. 

 

Now you say 'Not all women are like that', and maybe there is a bit of variation, but their nature is basically all the same. I honestly think it has to do with the XX chromosome. It's like none of them differentiate or expand into adulthood, like men do. It's almost like they contract instead.  I'm not complaining about it. It's just evolutionary forces at work, and being childlike is actually advantageous if you are raising them. However, given the current framework, where relationships are based on love and equality, getting involved with them is a bad idea, because a man can sacrifice his whole life for her, only to find out that she didn't really love him, despite repeatedly saying so otherwise. You find out the whole thing was just an act. 

 

You'd be surprised at how easy it is for a woman to move on from a relationship, completely cutting all contact off and never looking back, even if a man has invested his emotions or financial resources in her for years. Don't say I didn't warn you. You can feel like she took a part of you that you will never get back. This is the point at which men become bitter and indifferent to them. 



#16
Enter Ataraxia

Enter Ataraxia

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 40 posts
  • Location+0° 2′ 46.2″, 179° 56′ 39.4″ 7.9E2+/-420parsecs

LOL, Alislaw. Maybe you want to side with women, because you think it gives you brownie points with them. Unfortunately, a woman is NEVER on a man's side. Simply put, they think totally different from men. Women have different brains. For a woman, a man is simply a means to an end. Maybe you are young, maybe you think you are special, and maybe you want to believe in them. Unfortunately, if a man's relationship ever conflicts with her self-interest, she will betray you too. 

 

 

Dear bgates276, 

 

It is probably in your favor to better flesh out Alislaw's impetus in responding, at the very least to ease interactions on this forum. Additionally, I would consider thoroughly revisiting some of your own axioms on women. We are all interested in life and the future right, so why should we contend over such a matter as trivial as this? Alislaw has very likely had a fair amount of interactions with women in his life, be them positive or negative interactions, as we have all had. In my personal life and in what I have learned through reading and experience, the nature of the duration of human lifespans coupled with human biological underpinnings produces an existence where encounters with the other sex are highly probably. After some time, life eventually signals to an individual that there is a deficit in mating and makes individuals more inclined towards the opposite sex. Human culture and the computational might of the human brain make this picture and the manifestations of biological motivations extraordinarily complex. Viewing such a topic from the binary mindset of "good/bad" one is unequipped to handle the reality of the situation. In their life, men may have not have had positive experiences with women or with other men for that matter. Denigrating the opposite sex on the basis of an experience set of n = 1 (your life) and oversimplifying the implications of biological deviations inter-sexually and intra-sexually is not scientific nor is it practical in daily living. As a male, you are subjectively incapable of experiencing womanhood, and this state of being inherently puts you in a place of bias when discussing anything other than empirically based evidence, which you are not discussing. I wish you the best of progress in sort out feelings from thoughts and transitioning from anecdotal evidence to empirical evidence when you possess a belief. Lastly, I challenge you question your own notions of women and of life and explore other venues of mind. Thank you for reading this bgates276, have a nice day.

 

Kind regards,

Trevor 


  • Alislaws and SemenaMertvykh like this

"Utopia is the hope that the scattered fragments of good that we come across from time to time in our lives can be put together, one day, to reveal the shape of a new kind of life. The kind of life that yours should have been." - Bostrom

 


#17
SemenaMertvykh

SemenaMertvykh

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 30 posts

The fact that OP isn't in the gene pool makes me quite happy. FSM knows we need less people like him in the world.



#18
Alislaws

Alislaws

    Democratic Socialist Materialist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,511 posts
  • LocationLondon

LOL, Alislaw. Maybe you want to side with women, because you think it gives you brownie points with them. Unfortunately, a woman is NEVER on a man's side. Simply put, they think totally different from men. Women have different brains. For a woman, a man is simply a means to an end. Maybe you are young, maybe you think you are special, and maybe you want to believe in them. Unfortunately, if a man's relationship ever conflicts with her self-interest, she will betray you too. 

 

Now you say 'Not all women are like that', and maybe there is a bit of variation, but their nature is basically all the same. I honestly think it has to do with the XX chromosome. It's like none of them differentiate or expand into adulthood, like men do. It's almost like they contract instead.  I'm not complaining about it. It's just evolutionary forces at work, and being childlike is actually advantageous if you are raising them. However, given the current framework, where relationships are based on love and equality, getting involved with them is a bad idea, because a man can sacrifice his whole life for her, only to find out that she didn't really love him, despite repeatedly saying so otherwise. You find out the whole thing was just an act. 

 

You'd be surprised at how easy it is for a woman to move on from a relationship, completely cutting all contact off and never looking back, even if a man has invested his emotions or financial resources in her for years. Don't say I didn't warn you. You can feel like she took a part of you that you will never get back. This is the point at which men become bitter and indifferent to them. 

1. If I was looking for romance i'd guess that posting on a dating website, or signing up to tinder or something might be a little more effective than correcting incels on a forum with a large majority of male posters.

 

2. Enter Ataraxia said it better than I could. You're generalising all women based on a tiny sample. 

 

3. You have decided to blame all women for your failed relationships. As long as you keep pretending you're perfect and 50% of the human race is somehow universally defective you will never have a successful relationship with a woman. 

 

4. Have you ever had any female friends? Maybe someone you knew before puberty hit you? Do you not have a mother? Have you never even had a male friend with a girlfriend you have gotten to know in a non-romantic context?

 

How have you never worked with a woman in the course of your job?

 

It seems like 100% of your experience with women revolves around them being sexual/romantic/breeding partners, is that just the topic you're talking about? Or have you literally had zero interaction with women outside of dating?

 

5. Its very easy for a woman to move on from a relationship with a man she doesn't care about. Men also leave women they don't love all the time with no emotional problems. This is normal human behaviour.

 

Yes some women will lie and say they love you in order to take advantage of you, also some men will lie to women in the same way for the same reason. This is normal asshole behaviour. 

 

Pro tip - Don't date assholes. 


  • Enter Ataraxia likes this

#19
SemenaMertvykh

SemenaMertvykh

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 30 posts

lololol


  • BasilBerylium likes this




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users