Sometimes I wonder at the uniqueness of each individual's face. It just amazes me how everybody, no matter how numerous we have, has a different face. With the exception of twins and non-familial coincidental twins.
From an artist's point of view, lots of small details and imperfections and things like that. Many bodies have basically the same proportions - your hand is around the same length as the distance between your chin and eyebrows, eyes are an eyeball length apart, nose stops approximately halfway between the corner of the eyes and the chin.
But you probably have one eye slightly higher than the other, one eyebrow that is shaped different, or your nose might turn up ever-so-slightly. Your cheeks might show more "chub" when you smile compared to the next person, even though the weight is similar. I think this is why painted or drawn portraits sometimes don't quite capture someone's face, even though it seems horribly close and is obviously a picture of the subject - and weirdly, why simple caricatures seem to do such a good job. The folks that do them have trained themselves to notice and highlight these sorts of differences.
As a sidenote, I still find it amazing that the human brain is so quick to pick up such things, especially considering it takes training and practice to reproduce on paper.
Practically speaking, every face has to communicate, what, 20 bits of information, to avoid common doppelgängers via the birthday paradox? Probably even more. Very interesting.
People have proposed leveraging this to generate unique avatars, since you can just pick some random parameters for the arrangement of a stick figure face and it will probably look unique.
Openface (probably state-of-the-art currently? If I haven't missed anything) uses a 128-dimensional unit hypersphere to represent a face identity. They have likely optimized this, so it's the dimensionality that works well in practice, not too large, not too small. It's perhaps a bit bigger than it has to be, but it cannot be too big either because that would very likely lead to overfitting.
So that's 128*sizeof(float) = 512bytes = 4096 bits of information.
Kinda like an RSA private key :).
Get into the project by working right away on implementing a new feature or fixing an existing bug. Then spend additional time from your spare time learning the new stack. Bam, productive by end of week 1, 2 at the latest.
I did get an email from them which looked actually legit and opened it. It redirected me to a 404.
Is there a chance I could've been compromised in any way?
I'm guessing they couldn't have gotten much more than my IP address, maybe some cookies, all my passwords, private life?
You've got like 3 features, and a list of names with values for each one of those features. You could literally do
_, result = min([(sqrt((i.R - c.R)^2 + (i.G - c.R)^2 + (i.B - c.B)^2), c) for c in colors])
and you're done.
Why would you want a computer to come up with color names anyway? They're identifiers, so you want them to be consistent. What if it comes up with names like Piss or Ennui? Why go through that trouble?
I was also looking for a mention of such a statistic.
I have been vegetarian for 2+ years, occasionally cheat with sea food, but the idea of eating animal flesh grosses me out and i don't think I'll ever turn back.
I've been vegetarian for 10+ years, "lapsed" for a few months after my life was turned upside down by a series of events but quickly just went back to vegetarianism because it was easier for me. Once you get into a routine, you'll probably stick with it.
