I already posted this study before, but I'll admit, I didn't talk about this part since I wasn't sure what to make of that. Now, I realize that it might be the most brutal blackpill out of all there.
incels.is
Almost a month ago, I made the thread above, talking about a study which used AI to analyze attractiveness of people and find correlations between people's looks and their chance to be promoted in a company, the speed with which they are promoted, and how much money they make in those positions compared to the baseline. The reason why they used an AI to do that was because, when they used other people to judge those subjects' looks, they couldn't find any definitive proof of those correlations and had various contradictory results, while when the AI looked at their looks, it found clear correlations favoring good looking people.
Here's the brutal part which I didn't talk about in the previous thread. Those contradictory, unclear results, were mostly because of the age of the subjects. When people were judging other people's looks, age had a massive effect on that, with them rating old people significantly lower on average than young people. Therefore, when those old Chads and Stacies were treated better than their ugly peers, it counted as "ugly" people doing well, which screwed up the results and made it look like attractiveness didn't matter.
Those people weren't unattractive though. They were just aged, and when an AI that didn't give a shit about wrinkled skin and stuff like that, and looked solely at attractive traits like symmetrical faces and so on, it found that all attractive people, young and old, have massive advantages thanks to their attractiveness. Chad and Stacy never really "lose their looks", they just gain wrinkles masking them to other people's conscious minds, but they are still picked up unconsciously, and they still have advantages thanks to them.
Age still had a massive effect on an objective AI's assesment, but it was just about half of what it was when people were doing the ratings.
Objective, but not subjective, measures of facial attractiveness predict executive pay, likelihood of promotion to CEO and so on.
Damn. "Looks are subjective:soy::bluepill:" bros and "just make money, men are judged by their money not their attractiveness, that's for women:soy::redpill:" bros, are you both OK? CEO Selection and Executive Appearance Survey assessments have found limited evidence of benefits of executive...
incels.is
Almost a month ago, I made the thread above, talking about a study which used AI to analyze attractiveness of people and find correlations between people's looks and their chance to be promoted in a company, the speed with which they are promoted, and how much money they make in those positions compared to the baseline. The reason why they used an AI to do that was because, when they used other people to judge those subjects' looks, they couldn't find any definitive proof of those correlations and had various contradictory results, while when the AI looked at their looks, it found clear correlations favoring good looking people.
Here's the brutal part which I didn't talk about in the previous thread. Those contradictory, unclear results, were mostly because of the age of the subjects. When people were judging other people's looks, age had a massive effect on that, with them rating old people significantly lower on average than young people. Therefore, when those old Chads and Stacies were treated better than their ugly peers, it counted as "ugly" people doing well, which screwed up the results and made it look like attractiveness didn't matter.
Those people weren't unattractive though. They were just aged, and when an AI that didn't give a shit about wrinkled skin and stuff like that, and looked solely at attractive traits like symmetrical faces and so on, it found that all attractive people, young and old, have massive advantages thanks to their attractiveness. Chad and Stacy never really "lose their looks", they just gain wrinkles masking them to other people's conscious minds, but they are still picked up unconsciously, and they still have advantages thanks to them.
Age still had a massive effect on an objective AI's assesment, but it was just about half of what it was when people were doing the ratings.
.
