AI Can Accurately Determine Social Constructs Based Solely on X-Rays

Snake Baker

Guest
Robots continue to go into every more racist directions.

What good is a scientifically intelligent machine if it is no better than inbred trailer trash from the KKK?

Boston Globe:

A doctor can’t tell if somebody is Black, Asian, or white, just by looking at their X-rays. But a computer can, according to a surprising new paper by an international team of scientists, including researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Harvard Medical School.

The study found that an artificial intelligence program trained to read X-rays and CT scans could predict a person’s race with 90 percent accuracy. But the scientists who conducted the study say they have no idea how the computer figures it out.

“When my graduate students showed me some of the results that were in this paper, I actually thought it must be a mistake,”
said Marzyeh Ghassemi, an MIT assistant professor of electrical engineering and computer science, and coauthor of the paper, which was published Wednesday in the medical journal The Lancet Digital Health. “I honestly thought my students were crazy when they told me.”

At a time when AI software is increasingly used to help doctors make diagnostic decisions, the research raises the unsettling prospect that AI-based diagnostic systems could unintentionally generate racially biased results.
For example, an AI (with access to X-rays) could automatically recommend a particular course of treatment for all Black patients, whether or not it’s best for a specific person. Meanwhile, the patient’s human physician wouldn’t know that the AI based its diagnosis on racial data.

The research effort was born when the scientists noticed that an AI program for examining chest X-rays was more likely to miss signs of illness in Black patients. “We asked ourselves, how can that be if computers cannot tell the race of a person?” said Leo Anthony Celi, another coauthor and an associate professor at Harvard Medical School.

The research team, which included scientists from the United States, Canada, Australia, and Taiwan, first trained an AI system using standard data sets of X-rays and CT scans, where each image was labeled with the person’s race. The images came from different parts of the body, including the chest, hand, and spine. The diagnostic images examined by the computer contained no obvious markers of race, like skin color or hair texture.

Once the software had been shown large numbers of race-labeled images, it was then shown different sets of unlabeled images. The program was able to identify the race of people in the images with remarkable accuracy, often well above 90 percent. Even when images from people of the same size or age or gender were analyzed, the AI accurately distinguished between Black and white patients.


But how? Ghassemi and her colleagues remain baffled, but she suspects it has something to do with melanin, the pigment that determines skin color. Perhaps X-rays and CT scanners detect the higher melanin content of darker skin, and embed this information in the digital image in some fashion that human users have never noticed before. It’ll take a lot more research to be sure.

Could the test results amount to proof of innate differences between people of different races? Alan Goodman, a professor of biological anthropology at Hampshire College and coauthor of the book “Racism Not Race,” doesn’t think so. Goodman expressed skepticism about the paper’s conclusions and said he doubted other researchers will be able to reproduce the results. But even if they do, he thinks it’s all about geography, not race.

Where would we be without Jewish scientists explaining to us that reality isn’t really real?

Goodman said geneticists have found no evidence of substantial racial differences in the human genome. But they do find major differences between people based on where their ancestors lived.

“Instead of using race, if they looked at somebody’s geographic coordinates, would the machine do just as well?”
asked Goodman. “My sense is the machine would do just as well.”
It’s time to convince these robots of the truth of the Jews: race is a social construct.

These racist robots need to listen to the experts.

We cannot tolerate it.

Continue reading...
 

Maximum Scherzer

Well-known member
Old World Underground
Here's a little help for any doctors among us who are being outsmarted by the ai.
They deliberately didn't use X-rays of the skull. "The images came from different parts of the body, including the chest, hand, and spine."

So which is more likely: (A) X-rays are picking up melanin from skin or (B) There are smaller racial differences in skeletal structure just like there are large racial differences in skull shape?
 

Paul Harrell

This Country Belongs to the Gamers and Trolls
👑
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
🎩
⏰☕🚬🚽🚿🪒🏋🏻🥓💻⛪️
Escaped True Master
Forensic Files is one of the most race realist shows ever televised. It's like, "well we found this leg bone out in the woods. Based on physical characteristics such as shape and density, we're 80% sure it's from an Asian female in her 30s".

It's not really shocking that they've trained a computer to do what scientists were doing decades ago. What's baffling is these new supposed scientists claiming that this isn't something they've been doing manually for half a century or more.
 
Last edited:

JR_Rustler_III

🇰🇷 Gookwaffen 🇯🇵
Old World Underground
👑
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
🎩
⏰☕🚬🚽🚿🪒🏋🏻🥓💻⛪️🍖 💻🥩
Destructive Ceremonious Master
Could the test results amount to proof of innate differences between people of different races?
no, no, not that, that could never be true

Perhaps X-rays and CT scanners detect the higher melanin content of darker skin
Do these morons even know how x-rays work????? It's not possible that they are that stupid, but your average Boobus Americanus is a brain-dead moron, so I guess that's how they can get away with saying crap like this.
 

Paul Harrell

This Country Belongs to the Gamers and Trolls
👑
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
🎩
⏰☕🚬🚽🚿🪒🏋🏻🥓💻⛪️
Escaped True Master
Forensic Files is one of the most race realist shows ever televised. It's like, "well we found this leg bone out in the woods. Based on physical characteristics such as shape and density, we're 80% sure it's from an Asian female in her 30s".

It's not really shocking that they've trained a computer to do what scientists were doing decades ago. What's baffling is these new supposed scientists claiming that this isn't something they've been doing manually for half a century or more.
I think these right wing zoomers should go on Netflix (or wherever it is available these days) and binge watch the entire Forensic Files series before they go out and do race realism debates. A lot of the time they seem unprepared for debating race realism, and even when they are it's just referencing Alt Hype and arguing over whose talking points have been deboonked the hardest by the opposing side.

Race deniers (most normies) will literally argue that race is a skin color. One guy once told me that albino Africans are "white" as if this was some kind of checkmate. This was a smart white guy. These people believe that all the racial data that has been produced in the last 100 years has been deboonked by the imagined new space age SCIENCE with like, computers and lasers and such.

But how are you going to deboonk 50 years worth of solved murders thanks to old school "racist" forensic methods like measuring skulls? This is a show where they do a mini documentary every hour long episode on murder cases. They interview the forensic scientists and do a step by step walkthrough of the techniques used to solve the cases. More often than not they use some racist technique to figure out the race of the victim, which always wind up being vindicated both by more advanced methods (DNA) and the fact that measuring bones and skulls often turns out to be the cornerstone of solving murder mysteries.
 

Arminius

Commander-in-chief of the haters
👑
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
🎩
⏰☕🚬🚽🚿🪒🏋🏻🥓💻
I think these right wing zoomers should go on Netflix (or wherever it is available these days) and binge watch the entire Forensic Files series before they go out and do race realism debates. A lot of the time they seem unprepared for debating race realism, and even when they are it's just referencing Alt Hype and arguing over whose talking points have been deboonked the hardest by the opposing side.

Race deniers (most normies) will literally argue that race is a skin color. One guy once told me that albino Africans are "white" as if this was some kind of checkmate. This was a smart white guy. These people believe that all the racial data that has been produced in the last 100 years has been deboonked by the imagined new space age SCIENCE with like, computers and lasers and such.

But how are you going to deboonk 50 years worth of solved murders thanks to old school "racist" forensic methods like measuring skulls? This is a show where they do a mini documentary every hour long episode on murder cases. They interview the forensic scientists and do a step by step walkthrough of the techniques used to solve the cases. More often than not they use some racist technique to figure out the race of the victim, which always wind up being vindicated both by more advanced methods (DNA) and the fact that measuring bones and skulls often turns out to be the cornerstone of solving murder mysteries.
"If race doesn't exist then why can you do a DNA test to see your ancestry?"
 

commiesmasher

Macaroni bandit
Cave Beast
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
⏰☕🚬🚽🚿
“Instead of using race, if they looked at somebody’s geographic coordinates, would the machine do just as well?” asked Goodman. “My sense is the machine would do just as well.”
This is why I try not to use the term "race" - the race deniers always go for the EXACT SAME FALLACY: redefine the term "race" into absurdity. I just say something like:
"If we apply the same standards we apply to all other mammalian species to determine if they are polytypic with regards to subspecies, we will find that there are multiple human subspecies that correspond to the 6 historically defined major human "races" (Caucasoid, Negroid, Australoid, Capoid, Mongoloid, Americoid).

They really, really, REALLY HATE the term "race" for some reason. There's some sort of subconscious conditioned avoidance reflex programmed into them to deny it and grasp for straws, redefining the term until it's an impossible criteria to meet.
 

commiesmasher

Macaroni bandit
Cave Beast
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
⏰☕🚬🚽🚿
They will say ancestry is real but not race. Point out that race is based on ancestry and they'll say it's not, and give some retarded, modern invention of the term "race" that makes no sense.
I try to avoid the use of the term when debating.
"If race doesn't exist then why can you do a DNA test to see your ancestry?"
 

Arminius

Commander-in-chief of the haters
👑
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
🎩
⏰☕🚬🚽🚿🪒🏋🏻🥓💻
They will say ancestry is real but not race. Point out that race is based on ancestry and they'll say it's not, and give some retarded, modern invention of the term "race" that makes no sense.
I try to avoid the use of the term when debating.
These DNA tests for ancestry are all about what ethnicity your ancestors came from, so those arguments don't work. If you can figure out someone's ancestry/ethnicity with a DNA test, then saying that it is a social construct does not make sense. And if ethnicities are ancestry-based, then it you can't deny that race exists and is based on DNA, since races are simply collections of similar ethnicities. However, I don't think definitely convincing people that race exists is useful, if you get them to admit that ethnicities exist and are ancestry-based, then you can just say that certain ethnicities behave similarly and go from there. What I'm saying is that if you get someone to admit everything surrounding it, then it doesn't matter if you mention the term 'race'.

Race is more of a scientific concept anyway and doesn't have much meaning in the real world. It is useful for gaining understanding though, so it might still be worthwhile to convince someone of it.
 

Donk

Net-gun Nationalist
👑
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
🎩
⏰☕🚬🚽🚿🪒🏋🏻🥓💻⛪️🍖
Escaped True Master
"The study found that an artificial intelligence program trained to read X-rays and CT scans could predict a person’s race with 90 percent accuracy."


The other 10% were probably mulattoes. 😆
 

commiesmasher

Macaroni bandit
Cave Beast
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
⏰☕🚬🚽🚿
They will say ethnicities don't exist as biological realities either, or use common nonsense race denial arguments, like:
- ethnicity is real and prove race doesn't exist, so "white" / caucasoid and "black" / negroid make no sense
- ethnicities are mixed, there's no pure ethnicity, so caring about it is nonsense
- there is more variation within than between (lewontin's fallacy)
- the differences in ethnicities are mostly due to culture and language and wealth, anything else comes from that (besides "meaningless" physical differences like color, height, body shape, etc)

race is also entirely ancestry based as well, but like i said they will redefine the term into absurdity as their primary argument tactic. they will say that people behave similarly in an ethnicity because of culture, not genes
These DNA tests for ancestry are all about what ethnicity your ancestors came from, so those arguments don't work. If you can figure out someone's ancestry/ethnicity with a DNA test, then saying that it is a social construct does not make sense. And if ethnicities are ancestry-based, then it you can't deny that race exists and is based on DNA, since races are simply collections of similar ethnicities. However, I don't think definitely convincing people that race exists is useful, if you get them to admit that ethnicities exist and are ancestry-based, then you can just say that certain ethnicities behave similarly and go from there. What I'm saying is that if you get someone to admit everything surrounding it, then it doesn't matter if you mention the term 'race'.

Race is more of a scientific concept anyway and doesn't have much meaning in the real world. It is useful for gaining understanding though, so it might still be worthwhile to convince someone of it.
 

Arminius

Commander-in-chief of the haters
👑
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
🎩
⏰☕🚬🚽🚿🪒🏋🏻🥓💻
They will say ethnicities don't exist as biological realities either, or use common nonsense race denial arguments, like:
- ethnicity is real and prove race doesn't exist, so "white" / caucasoid and "black" / negroid make no sense
- ethnicities are mixed, there's no pure ethnicity, so caring about it is nonsense
- there is more variation within than between (lewontin's fallacy)
- the differences in ethnicities are mostly due to culture and language and wealth, anything else comes from that (besides "meaningless" physical differences like color, height, body shape, etc)

race is also entirely ancestry based as well, but like i said they will redefine the term into absurdity as their primary argument tactic. they will say that people behave similarly in an ethnicity because of culture, not genes
You said before that they will say these things, and I know that there are people who say these things, but it doesn't make them true. If you can determine someone's ethnicity from their DNA, then everything follows from that. But again, mentioning 'race' as a term doesn't matter.
 

Paul Harrell

This Country Belongs to the Gamers and Trolls
👑
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
🎩
⏰☕🚬🚽🚿🪒🏋🏻🥓💻⛪️
Escaped True Master
This is why I like the forensic files approach. You can go back and forth about terminology and deboonking and everything else forever, but you can't weasel your way around "they literally found a bone in the dirt and measured it with a ruler to accurately predict race and sex".

It also hits much harder when your example is as black and white as a murder case, instead of something more abstract like research in a textbook. Either you solve the murder or you don't.
 

Arminius

Commander-in-chief of the haters
👑
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
🎩
⏰☕🚬🚽🚿🪒🏋🏻🥓💻
This is why I like the forensic files approach. You can go back and forth about terminology and deboonking and everything else forever, but you can't weasel your way around "they literally found a bone in the dirt and measured it with a ruler to accurately predict race and sex".
You can weasel your way out of that in the same way that you can weasel your way out of DNA tests: by denying reality.
"Oh, but just because there are some physical differences doesn't mean that race exists or if it exists, it is mostly cultural anyway"
 

Paul Harrell

This Country Belongs to the Gamers and Trolls
👑
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
🎩
⏰☕🚬🚽🚿🪒🏋🏻🥓💻⛪️
Escaped True Master
You can weasel your way out of that in the same way that you can weasel your way out of DNA tests: by denying reality.
"Oh, but just because there are some physical differences doesn't mean that race exists or if it exists, it is mostly cultural anyway"
But now you have them on the back foot and you can assault the new talking points. "Some physical differences" is a concession.

Anyway, I've used this line of argumentation IRL and it's super effective. People will short circuit and literally rage quit.
 

Arminius

Commander-in-chief of the haters
👑
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
🎩
⏰☕🚬🚽🚿🪒🏋🏻🥓💻

JR_Rustler_III

🇰🇷 Gookwaffen 🇯🇵
Old World Underground
👑
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
🎩
⏰☕🚬🚽🚿🪒🏋🏻🥓💻⛪️🍖 💻🥩
Destructive Ceremonious Master
However, I don't think definitely convincing people that race exists is useful, if you get them to admit that ethnicities exist and are ancestry-based, then you can just say that certain ethnicities behave similarly and go from there.
Bingo. Once you start framing everything in terms of ethnicities, then the race question becomes irrelevant. In fact, the Jews use race as a huge distraction, because it keeps you from noticing that their greasy fingerprints are all over America's "race" problem, which is really better framed as ethnic conflict. And nobody knows how to engineer ethnic conflict better than The Eternal Jew.

Ethnicity obviously has a genetic component, but the major determinants of ethnicity are language, culture, and religion, and these determinants are more malleable than genetics. Fifty years ago, black Americans and white Americans shared a common language, culture, and religion, broadly speaking at least. Then beginning in the 1960s, the Jews started working to change that. By the late 1980s, black culture, language, and religion began to diverge dramatically from American culture, language, and religion. The Jews did this using many different instruments of control:

* they undermined and destroyed the black family unit by getting blacks addicted to welfare, and subsidizing black single motherhood
* they forced economic integration, which destroyed tens of thousands of successful small black businesses
* they used integration to create chaos in the K-12 educational system which undermined black academic performance
* they used their control of the music business specifically, and the entertainment business generally, to promote a new black culture based on violence, degeneracy, and depravity, and to ruin the language that the blacks spoke
* as blacks became more violent, more degenerate, and less family-oriented, they increasingly abandoned Christianity. And the Jews of course used the prison system to promote Islam to the blacks as a direct attack on Christianity.

Most people here are probably too young to remember a time when most black Americans behaved pretty decently, although with respect to urban blacks, you have to go all the way back to the 1950s or early 1960s. Even today you can find blacks raised in decent families, who work decent jobs, and behave decently, although their numbers are dwindling.

Future historians will look back and marvel at what a thorough job the Jews did in ruining America.
 
Last edited:

Paul Harrell

This Country Belongs to the Gamers and Trolls
👑
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
🎩
⏰☕🚬🚽🚿🪒🏋🏻🥓💻⛪️
Escaped True Master
I have been trying to tell @commiesmasher the same thing about DNA tests.


Same with me and DNA tests.
Yeah, there are multiple ways to skin a cat. For me DNA is just such a broad topic that's too easy to get lost in the weeds with. With DNA there's all these rabbit holes and stuff that no normal person can verify, whereas with forensic files it's very visceral and concrete. There was a bone, they measured it. They made a prediction. The prediction was verified by the facts of a murder investigation. There's no "well actually, this new research paper by Dr Jewishberg totally deboonks your outdated methods! The science has changed!"
 

CharlesWorthing

🙊Dog Faced🙊🦴🦴🙊Pony Soldier🙊
Old World Underground
👑
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
🎩
⏰☕🚬🚽🚿🪒🏋🏻🥓💻⛪️🍖
One guy used evolution to design circuits which didn't follow conventional rules. They did all sorts of amazing things. But he couldn't figure out how they worked. He used simulations to evolve them. The simulations were physically accurate enough that the real world implementation worked.

They trained pigeons to recognize sports cars with 90% accuracy. Researchers were able to capitalise on their neural nets for all sorts of purposes.

 
Top