[HN Gopher] LooksMapping
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       LooksMapping
        
       Author : elsewhen
       Score  : 102 points
       Date   : 2025-07-04 03:55 UTC (19 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (looksmapping.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (looksmapping.com)
        
       | pimlottc wrote:
       | This is gross on multiple levels.
        
         | tra3 wrote:
         | I had a quasi physical reaction when reading the description.
         | Not a good one.
         | 
         | I don't remember hotornot being amongst asimovs 3 laws of
         | robotics..is this really the future we deserve?
         | 
         | The author is gonna be vilified, but next year someone's gonna
         | come up with a cute name and a material design for this and
         | gonna make bank.
         | 
         | I'm kinda curious to see what 1/10 people look like but these
         | are real people right.
        
         | ynab10 wrote:
         | I have a feeling that so are you.
        
         | rybosome wrote:
         | This appears to me to be intentional and ironic to make a point
         | rather than in earnest.
         | 
         | I am interpreting this as a statement about snap judgements in
         | an age where AI will increasingly play the role of a judge or
         | assessor of humans.
         | 
         | Perhaps I'm wrong, but it seems too on-the-nose to be serious.
         | 
         | EDIT:
         | 
         | > This website just puts reductive numbers on the superficial
         | calculations we make every day
         | 
         | From the website. If it is in earnest then I'd be embarrassed
         | to have shilled for it, because I agree that the idea is stupid
         | and gross.
        
           | hyperbolablabla wrote:
           | I really do think it's in earnest. I think the author is
           | trying to justify its existence as "already a part of
           | reality". I think it's quite despicable actually.
        
           | bryanrasmussen wrote:
           | from their site https://walzr.com/
           | 
           | they made a fake steakhouse real for one night, got Twitter
           | to verify a fake candidate for congress, etc. etc.
           | 
           | all signs point to art project.
        
         | debesyla wrote:
         | I see this as an art project. (And technical exploration,
         | because I wonder how did they manage to scrape Google.)
         | 
         | It's made by the dude that has a lot of similarly strange and
         | technologically impressive projects: https://walzr.com/
        
         | Takennickname wrote:
         | Nice try, restaurant owner with ugly people.
        
       | brcmthrowaway wrote:
       | When happens when a creator is stuck in a Twitter bubble
        
         | Mashimo wrote:
         | What kind of bubble do you think he is in?
        
       | cobertos wrote:
       | > But we judge places by the people who go there. We always have.
       | 
       | Does anyone do this for a restaurants? That's not something that
       | ever really factored into my food habits
        
         | 01HNNWZ0MV43FF wrote:
         | OP might be The American Psycho
        
           | bryanrasmussen wrote:
           | BusinessCardMapping.
        
         | thinkingemote wrote:
         | I think we use all our senses out in the real world when
         | choosing some place to eat. Seeing the people who eat there is
         | certainly one factor. Online maybe too if we look at the food
         | pictures, read how the items are worded, look at a restaurant
         | website and read the reviews we can get a sense of the types of
         | people it appeals to. It's probably not the primary factor, but
         | it is one attribute. There are anecdotal reports of
         | establishments paying PR professionals (e.g. good looking
         | models) to be there - and obviously they will use them for
         | their promotional material.
         | 
         | It's good to listen and notice how one is being influenced. The
         | real mistake is thinking we do not judge at all.
         | 
         | With that said, only looking at a rating of profile pictures of
         | reviews to judge a restaurant is very funny and becomes art.
         | Kudos to the creator.
        
           | eddythompson80 wrote:
           | The app is cool, but the argument there was either written by
           | AI or there is a lost in translation moment because it
           | doesn't really make any sense.
           | 
           | In your argument you're basically saying "it's impossible to
           | know what affects your choice of where to eat. Some think
           | looks matter even pay for it; ergo, we must consider it too"
           | 
           | What about music type? Worker's uniform color? Thinking "I
           | wanna eat where the hot people are" is... I don't know.. Odd?
        
             | thinkingemote wrote:
             | > Thinking "I wanna eat where the hot people are" is... I
             | don't know.. Odd?
             | 
             | Well my response was to the question "Does anyone do this
             | for restaurants?" and tried to answer it by saying "yes,
             | many people may consider it along with other factors"
             | 
             | Yes, I agree it is superficial and odd to consciously and
             | only think it. But we choose things with a range of
             | subconscious influences, multiple reasons. Yes, uniforms
             | and music could also be influences too. We could stop and
             | spend time examining our thoughts and feelings to identify
             | all the factors but generally people don't do that do they?
             | :-)
             | 
             | And if you think about bars... it becomes commonplace for
             | some people. "I want to drink where the hot people are"
             | seems to be a very commonplace thought, or at least a
             | thought which is encouraged by the marketing of bars.
             | 
             | Thinking wider now, we can ponder why do many places hire
             | attractive people in their marketing photos? We humans are
             | more superficial and less rational than we would like to
             | admit to ourselves.
             | 
             | Personally I prefer real ale so will drink where the beer
             | is better, but if I'm on a date where my friend doesn't
             | appreciate beer as much, I will choose a nicer feeling and
             | looking establishment over the beer quality. The people
             | inside the place might or might not influence that choice
             | to a greater or lesser extent. It is at the very least a
             | factor. For a restaurant I think it's less of a factor.
        
       | getcrunk wrote:
       | I respect the novelty. It's a meme idea, but the problem solving
       | and coding is still legit as a quick and fun challenge.
       | 
       | Any details on how you managed to scrape the all mighty goog?
        
         | ouked wrote:
         | OP may have used their own method, but I believe you could use
         | a provider like SerpAPI.
        
         | londons_explore wrote:
         | Just script a real browser with a chrome extension, and let it
         | run kinda slowly overnight.
         | 
         | The rate limits are such that you can get tens of millions of
         | data points just from a single browser.
        
       | EarlKing wrote:
       | ..........not a hotdog.
        
       | Mashimo wrote:
       | Why is 2/3 of LA restaurant visited by "old" people per this map?
       | 
       | I assume it's a racial thing and the AI could not really detect
       | the age correctly?
       | 
       | In NY the Irish pubs are tagged as old, which kinda makes sense.
        
         | dan-robertson wrote:
         | Another bias can be who leaves reviews.
        
       | preetsojitra wrote:
       | What about the ethical concerns? Scrapping faces of people and
       | feeding them into AI model without their permission.
        
         | gkbrk wrote:
         | It's all public pictures though. Why would I publish a picture
         | of my face if I don't want people to have a picture of my face?
        
           | jeauxlb wrote:
           | I can go into an art gallery but I may not touch the works.
           | Often there aren't physical barriers but we all understand
           | some behaviours are not acceptable.
           | 
           | Similarly, publication of an image on the internet is not
           | implicit permission to use it for any possible purpose,
           | however technically feasible. For example, deepfakes.
        
             | gkbrk wrote:
             | If you draw a mustache on a drawing in an art gallery, you
             | ruin the original for everyone else. If you take the
             | drawing home, no one else has the original any more.
             | 
             | If I download, copy, or edit images sent to my computer,
             | the original is still there.
             | 
             | The artist puts their art on the gallery with the intent
             | that people will enter that gallery and look at it without
             | touching. The image uploaders uploads the image with the
             | intent that a copy (not the original) gets sent to our
             | computers when we look at Google Reviews.
        
               | preetsojitra wrote:
               | You're misinterpreting the analogy.
               | 
               | - Drawing a mustache on the art = Vandalizing the
               | original data (not what's happening).
               | 
               | - Taking the art home = Deleting the original data (also
               | not what's happening).
               | 
               | - Scraping faces for an AI = Following visitors around
               | the gallery, taking secret photos of them, and publishing
               | a book that rates them by attractiveness.
               | 
               | The fact that the gallery is "public" does not make that
               | behavior acceptable. The same is true here. "Publicly
               | viewable" does not mean "publicly available for any use."
        
               | gkbrk wrote:
               | > Following visitors around the gallery, taking secret
               | photos of them, and publishing a book that rates them by
               | attractiveness.
               | 
               | Gallery visitors aren't publicly publishing gallery
               | reviews with their pictures. This website doesn't go into
               | restaurants and take pictures of the customers.
               | 
               | All the pictures here were attached to restaurant reviews
               | by the person themselves with the expectation that the
               | picture would be sent to others and be available to
               | people not currently in the restaurant.
        
               | brigandish wrote:
               | > taking secret photos of them,
               | 
               | The visitors took the photo, supplied the photo, and put
               | it in a public place.
        
             | Dracophoenix wrote:
             | Similarly, publication of an image on the internet is not
             | implicit permission to use it for any possible purpose,
             | however technically feasible.
             | 
             | Are memes, or for that matter, satire and parody unethical?
        
           | eddythompson80 wrote:
           | Honestly the answer is "most people didn't really expect that
           | to be a thing when they did that" add those to all the people
           | who "didn't know that I was giving it to everyone. I thought
           | this was between me and.. like.. yelp and people in my city"
           | 
           | It's very confusing to technical people, but plenty of people
           | were (still are) confused by the concept of the internet.
           | What do you think all those people posting private
           | information on each other's facebook walls were doing? They
           | are on _their_ computer talking to _their_ family member. How
           | is anybody else getting in here?
        
       | 1GZ0 wrote:
       | I love how quick people are to dismiss the obvious technical
       | skill involved in making something like this, just because of the
       | off-color premise.
        
         | IncreasePosts wrote:
         | Who's dismissing the obvious technical skill?
        
       | donatj wrote:
       | This is some _old internet_ style shenanigans powered by modern
       | technology.
       | 
       | I am here for it. I want more of this.
        
         | yapyap wrote:
         | You can tell from the old google logo style as well haha
        
       | meindnoch wrote:
       | What's the purpose of this?                 .pix {           /*
       | Simulate CRT pixelation and low resolution */           text-
       | rendering: optimizeSpeed;           font-family: Arial, sans-
       | serif;           font-smooth: never;           -webkit-font-
       | smoothing: none;           -moz-osx-font-smoothing: grayscale;
       | /* Simulate slight pixelation */           filter: blur(0.3px);
       | color: black;           font-size: 16px;                  }
        
         | tauntz wrote:
         | Aesthetics
        
         | erikig wrote:
         | Yep, makes the site look like it was rendered on an old browser
         | on a CRT.
        
         | rdlw wrote:
         | It simulates CRT pixelization and low resolution
        
       | jofzar wrote:
       | https://looksmapping.com/paper.pdf
       | 
       | This feels oddly old school shit posty made reality
        
       | defyonce wrote:
       | Top 5 Restaurants (Female vs Male Preferences)
       | Female Picks:
       | ------------------------------------------------       1. Big
       | Apple Brunch          | Hell's Kitchen     | 9.2/10       2.
       | Pietro Nolita             | Nolita             | 8.6/10       3.
       | Kanu Bar|Grill            | Hamilton Heights   | 8.5/10       4.
       | STK Steakhouse Downtown   | West Village       | 8.2/10       5.
       | Lighthouse Fish Market    | East Harlem        | 8.2/10
       | Male Picks:
       | ------------------------------------------------       1. Lahori
       | Kabab              | Kips Bay           | 2.3/10       2. Big Arc
       | Chicken           | East Village       | 2.5/10       3. Hop Won
       | Express           | Midtown East       | 3.1/10       4. Subway
       | | Hell's Kitchen     | 3.1/10       5. Nica Trattoria
       | | Upper East Side    | 3.1/10
       | 
       | it looks like female => attractive
        
         | foresterre wrote:
         | This was the first thing that stood out to me too.
         | 
         | I sampled quite some dark red markers, representing
         | "attractive", and on the balance they're almost always
         | overwhelmingly reviewed by females.
         | 
         | There were some exceptions though. Especially in the south west
         | for Chinese cuisine.
        
         | Takennickname wrote:
         | Your data is incorrect. That ranking is for male vs female
         | (higher number = female).
         | 
         | The hot vs not score is a separate score. (e.g you have Big Arc
         | chicken as a 2.5. That means mostly male. It's hotness score is
         | 5.5)
        
         | IncreasePosts wrote:
         | It's probably more like "interested in social media" -> more
         | likely to have a very good shot of you as your profile pic ->
         | more likely to be considered attractive.
         | 
         | So perhaps this is really just searching for restaurants that
         | people into social media review.
        
       | ljsprague wrote:
       | It's missing large parts of LA.
        
       | yapyap wrote:
       | that's awful, I love it
        
       | TheLockranore wrote:
       | This sounds like the opening premise of a 90's romcom.
        
       | bemmu wrote:
       | I think there's a category of these kinds of things where you
       | apply AI to do something humans could do, but could not be
       | bothered to do. Or could not profitably do. At least no human
       | would categorize all these reviews just for lols.
       | 
       | Another recent example from HN would be that site which just
       | lists hotel rooms that have a desk and a chair. It would be an
       | incredibly dull task for a human to look at a million hotel room
       | pictures and just select if they have a desk or not.
       | 
       | What else somewhat useful/fun could we do applying perhaps a
       | little worse than human attention at something, but a lot of it?
        
       | d--b wrote:
       | This was a fun website until I realized that restaurants in
       | Harlem score overwhelmingly "not hot".
       | 
       | This sucks.
        
       | ChrisArchitect wrote:
       | NYT feature on this a few days ago
       | 
       |  _The Map Rating Restaurants Based on How Hot the Customers Are_
       | 
       | https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/01/dining/looksmapping-hot-c...
       | (https://archive.ph/3ItEb)
       | (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44444973)
        
       | esafak wrote:
       | Given that we're talking about NY, shouldn't it be Hot Dog
       | (Stand) or Not?
        
       | Eduard wrote:
       | took only a few checks for me to come to the conclusion that the
       | setup has the age-old heavy bias towards beauty standards. I.e.,
       | if customers are black or Asian, hotness ranking goes down.
        
         | landl0rd wrote:
         | No, the setup doesn't. It's aggregating people's behaviors and
         | preferences. People appear to have a preference; whether it's
         | good or bad, natural or ingrained, or some combination thereof,
         | is a matter for discussion.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-07-04 23:01 UTC)