I mean, I bet they did, but you can't test it with all the photos ever taken of you. Someone probably tried dozens of photos to get this result. Which, to be clear, I admire.

They did, they know it doesn't work, but they are already too far down in the money hole. Gotta grift and bullshit and spread bigotry until they make back the money.

Edit: Some words

The false result is from some unrelated gender detection tool that has nothing to do with the app. Nothing here indicates the actual app makes the same error.

The post is basically saying "this thing doesn't work because I tried something else and it didn't work".

The heat emission is the smoke they're trying to blow up my ass.

as in how hot the person in the picture is?

Could be analysing 4 band imagery with an NIR layer. But then that usually comes from satellite imagery so it would make identifying gender challenging. I'd struggle with just a grainy image of the top of someone's head, even if I knew how warm it was.

Well, Big Shaq told us all that Man's not hot.

Ah straight out of the Dictatorship Surviour's Guide for Middle Management playbook.

The problem that right wing fuckwits always need somebody to hate and discriminate against.

The problem it solves is that she needs plenty of money with little effort and morals are not a limiting factor. And what Diplomjodler3 said.

I fed it a pre-HRT pic and got "Woman, 56% confident". Lol. I guess it's kind of affirming to think a machine could see the real me back then?

Interestingly, my first conversation with a teenager (I wasn't related to) in about 15 years began with asking about pronouns. It's very painless and easy to normalize as long as you don't have a reactionary person nearby.

Also, the kids are alright.

I assumed most terfs were cis het gender conforming people. Is there data showing that one way or another?

Tldr: TERFs aren’t just mad about being misgendered as men, (wrong but at least higher status) they’re mostly mad about being misgendered as trans (wrong and lower status).

Eh, TERFs in particular really lean on three things: "men bad/dangerous/evil/predators", "women good, but need protected from predation" and "you can't change which one you are, if you think you can it's either mental illness or a ploy."

It's why they focus so heavily on trans women (and generally ignore trans men), especially trans women in spaces that are traditionally women-only. It's why their language around the topic is so heavily drenched in the notion that trans women are "men in dresses" who are dressing up like that to get access to women's spaces - the whole presumption is that trans women are sexual predators in costume to get access to prey in more vulnerable situations.

Yup if you give information to a company it's now theirs. The old adage about being the product if you're not paying no longer applies. Now you are the product even if you're paying.

Yeah, this is a valid point, if this is the exact case or not I don't know, but a lot of people don't realize a lot of the weird biases that can appear in the training data.

Like that AI trained to detect ig a mole was cancer or not. A lot of the training data that was cancer had rulers in them. So the AI learned rulers are cancerous.

I could easily see something stupid like angle the picture was taken from being something the AI erroniously assumed to be useful for determining biological sex in this case.

It's possible to manipulate an image in a way that the original and the new one are indistinguishable to the human eye, but the AI model gives completely different results.

Like this helpful graphic I found

Or... edit the HTML...

They said it includes heat emissions. Which is impossible without an IR camera that everyone totally has. I love it when bullshit tech charlatans tell on themselves.