They See Your Photos

Perceived Accuracy and Behavior

• Most users report the tool is wildly inaccurate beyond obvious visual facts (age band, race, clothing, rough setting).
• Personality traits, income, religion, politics, sexuality, and “biases” are often incorrect, contradictory, or mutually inconsistent across runs.
• Same photo uploaded twice can yield different personality and bias profiles; different photos of same person can yield opposite traits.
• Many liken it to horoscopes, astrology, or Mad Libs: vague, generic, sometimes accidentally resonant, but not systematically reliable.

Geolocation and EXIF Debate

• Several users saw surprisingly precise location guesses (e.g., specific landmarks), which some attribute to EXIF metadata.
• Others stripped EXIF and still got good or at least plausible geolocation, suggesting visual geoguessing from background cues.
• Some users, however, saw completely wrong countries or cities, especially for nature scenes.

Bias, Stereotyping, and Harmful Inferences

• Outputs frequently lean on demographic stereotypes: race, age, clothing, and setting strongly drive assumptions about income, religion, political affiliation, and even criminality or substance abuse.
• Many examples show offensive or absurd attributions (e.g., casteism, racism, addictions, low self-esteem, specific party alignments) with no visible justification.
• Sexual orientation is usually defaulted to heterosexual; queer couples or individuals are misclassified.
• Users characterize it as a “stereotype machine,” with repeated canned labels like confirmation bias, in‑group bias, ageism, classism.

Purpose, Messaging, and Trust

• Some see the site as dishonest fear‑mongering or “rage‑bait,” exaggerating current capabilities to scare users about big tech.
• Others argue the accuracy isn’t the point: it illustrates the kinds of inferences companies might attempt and how wrong guesses could still affect people when embedded in opaque decision systems.
• There is concern it doubles as an advertisement for a competing encrypted photo service and possibly a data‑collection honeypot; several users refuse to upload real or friends’ photos.

Broader Reflections on AI Profiling

• Commenters note that existing trackers, purchase history, and browsing behavior likely provide much stronger targeting signals than such image-based psychometrics.
• Some worry that even partially accurate guesses, when combined with other data, could significantly enhance profiling.
• A minority find the demo “fascinating” or illuminating, preferring such capabilities to be visible to the public rather than hidden.