Read on Twitter
Look, the S*n has only gone and done a responsible science reporting.
Of course the S*n is what it is, and it will look at everything it considers publishing through the lens of “Will this give your everyday fascist OAP man a semi?”
With some obligatory royal family chat thrown in for the wives. But...
This time they actually talked to the scientists, just like we keep telling reporters we should.
They really did, got them on the record and everything.
And the scientist helpfully ran their machine learning on the hot celebs, for the edification of s*n readers.
“We can’t say precisely why, but something something babymaking.” -EvoPsych.
Now, I’m not an expert, but if I know exactly what goes into making the score, I would hesitate to call it machine learning.
AWAT. (By the way did anyone check if the weak increase in “trustworthiness displays” in the original “dataset” could be explained by the occurrence of more women’s portraits?)
Just ... read the bits in quotes. I can’t.
Here’s the rest of it. I’m tired.
