Re: Are You My Mother?

1

Bad link.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 7:52 AM
horizontal rule
2

Anyway, I got a 105.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 7:59 AM
horizontal rule
3

Prosopagnosia isn't actually about remembering the names that go with faces.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 8:07 AM
horizontal rule
4

I got 111.

I don't feel I was particularly concentrating, though. The first phase lasted long enough that I started getting bored. I suspect if I'd had half the number of faces, or it had gone by faster, I'd have done better.

I don't actually think I'm great at matching names and faces. I am fairly good at remember people I've met or seen before, though. Basic face recognition, rather than face plus name.


Posted by: nattarGcM ttaM | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 8:09 AM
horizontal rule
5

Speaking of casino greeters I was recently slightly dumbfounded to have been remembered after a gap of about two months by a guy with whom I interacted for all of about five minutes.

As written the above is likely to generate lots of winking replies, isn't it?


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 8:09 AM
horizontal rule
6

Yes. If people get a different hair style or new glasses or change clothes, then I have trouble. This thing had many non-facial cues so I did fine.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 8:10 AM
horizontal rule
7

6 to 3.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 8:10 AM
horizontal rule
8

Prosopagnosia isn't actually about remembering the names that go with faces.

To be fair, neither is the test.

I did much better than I thought I would (109 or 84% correct), but it's a much easier task to recognise a face/name pair than to recall a name given a face. If it had been the latter (even with multiple choice), I'd have got maybe 10% correct.


Posted by: Ginger Yellow | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 8:12 AM
horizontal rule
9

Speaking of casino greeters I was recently slightly dumbfounded to have been remembered after a gap of about two months by a guy with whom I interacted for all of about five minutes.

Don't they have facial recognition cameras for card counters etc and just pipe the names into the greeters' earpieces


Posted by: Ginger Yellow | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 8:13 AM
horizontal rule
10

I have reason to believe that that was not at issue.


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 8:17 AM
horizontal rule
11

9: that would be a significantly worse solution that hiring people who are good at remembering people they've met.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 8:22 AM
horizontal rule
12

Also this test is terrible. Terrible!


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 8:22 AM
horizontal rule
13

I got 122. I got bored as hell in the study phase or I'd have done a lot better. I also don't actually do well with remembering names IRL. People I've met before, or seen in meetings? I remember meeting them, often for as long a gap as you like.


Posted by: Annelid Gustator | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 8:23 AM
horizontal rule
14

Actually I'm not sure what they're testing. If they're testing whether gender-consistent name/image pairs are more memorable than gender-inconsistent name-image pairs then it isn't bad. But it's going to be pretty easy for a lot of people for reasons that really have nothing to do with face memory.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 8:24 AM
horizontal rule
15

13 meet 4.


Posted by: nattarGcM ttaM | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 8:25 AM
horizontal rule
16

I haven't taken the test, but I'll mention that People Are Not Very Good at Matching Photographs to People.

In one test, passport officers had to decide whether or not a photograph of an individual presented on their computer screen matched the face of a person standing in front of their desk.

It was found that on 15% of trials the officers decided that the photograph on their screen matched the face of the person standing in front of them, when in fact, the photograph showed an entirely different person.


Posted by: NickS | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 8:25 AM
horizontal rule
17

16: people are not very good at matching photographs of unfamiliar people to people. They're essentially perfect at matching photographs of familiar people to those people.

But that study is fantastic, and the people who did it would very much agree with my comments 12 and 14.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 8:27 AM
horizontal rule
18

15% seems pretty good. Better than bouncers were at getting people with borrowed driver licenses when I was in college.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 8:27 AM
horizontal rule
19

They don't give you long enough to come up with "I'll think of my friend Tony when I see this face named Tony." Then I got distracted so I didn't actually take test.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 8:30 AM
horizontal rule
20

9: that would be a significantly worse solution that hiring people who are good at remembering people they've met.

I'm sure they do that too, but what I mean is they've got the facial recognition technology going on anyway for people they want to keep out, so they might as well use it for people they want to keep in as well.


Posted by: Ginger Yellow | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 8:30 AM
horizontal rule
21

18: that's using recent, high-quality images. If the images are older (like a license picture taken two years ago, say) the error rate rises substantially (to above 20%).


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 8:30 AM
horizontal rule
22

I got 114 which is way, way better than I thought I was doing during the test. I can't help but suspect that I just got lucky on a bunch of them.


Posted by: MHPH | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 8:30 AM
horizontal rule
23

20: sure, right, of course. But facial recognition is shitty, is my point.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 8:31 AM
horizontal rule
24

21: It's probably even higher when the incentive for being right is not getting to take money from somebody.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 8:32 AM
horizontal rule
25

Especially when it's facial recognotion from odd angles, like you'd see with a casino surveillance camera system that's mostly up at ceiling level. But even with good quality pictures, once a greeter had seen somebody more than three or four times at most they would be dramatically better than any computer system yet devised.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 8:33 AM
horizontal rule
26

24: right. Darkness and folded up twenties hinder unfamiliar face recognition.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 8:33 AM
horizontal rule
27

25 is 23 cont'd.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 8:34 AM
horizontal rule
28

18: I had a fortuitous fake ID in college -- a friend's boyfriend picked up a lost over-21 college ID he found on his (different) campus, noticed the picture looked like me, and gave it to me rather than returning it like a good citizen. Consistently, when I used it, it'd get a long look to the ID, long look back at me, and then some version of "You should change your hair back -- it looked much better that way."


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 8:34 AM
horizontal rule
29

I knew a woman who got caught because she was 5'8" or so and the license she borrowed was from somebody 5'1".


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 8:35 AM
horizontal rule
30

Problems:
* Vast majority of surnames Anglo - probably giving advantage to Brits who are more used to keeping hordes of Taylors, Smiths, and Watsons straight
* Some male names with female faces (Gerry) and vice versa (Billie)
* Instead of mixing up names and faces previously shown, they showed a lot of completely new names and/or new faces, so I could mark it as "new" without necessarily having the connection in my head

Still, I got a score of 114, 79th percentile, 88% correctly identified, which I did not expect.


Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 8:35 AM
horizontal rule
31

34th percentile here, and I think that may have been misleadingly high; like Minivet, I think I was reliably eliminating the totally new names, which made guessing on the rest easier.

But I nearly had a panic attack during the study phase -- the faces just kept coming. If it had gone on for about twenty more seconds I would have quit because I couldn't handle it.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 8:42 AM
horizontal rule
32

I got 90, and am astonished that 18% of the testers did worse than I did. I am really dreadful not just with matching faces to names, but with understanding whether a face I see is one I have seen before.


Posted by: Nworb Werdna | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 8:43 AM
horizontal rule
33

I was trying to show Sally the face-recognition quiz linked here a couple of years ago, but the site (assuming I successfully located the same site) had a different quiz up on recognition of celebrities. Given how bad I am at face recognition generally, I was surprised to be flawless on the celebrities I know. I think I must be deeply terrible at learning to recognize faces, but once a face makes it into my memory, I'm fine at retrieving them.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 8:45 AM
horizontal rule
34

I got a 116 and I self identify as someone, like Nworb, who can neither match names to faces nor tell whether a face is one I've seen. (And actually there were a couple in the test phase that I was sure about but I just answered wrong because of a clicking error or being distracted.) But I don't think it was really testing either of those skills, if the face-name pairs were consistent.

Also, I used a strategy -- I tried to quickly come up with a mnemonic when the face/name was first presented, and it often worked.


Posted by: Tia | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 8:48 AM
horizontal rule
35

105 (52nd percentile). I don't know if the instructions would have helped, but I assumed I would have to match names with faces and, like Heebie, I was trying to come up with mnemonics, which worked for, like, 5 seconds; after about 20 faces I said, Oh, fuck this and just waited for it to end; then I thought the test itself was surprisingly easy. I feel like I could have done somewhat better if I knew what was being tested.


Posted by: Yawnoc | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 8:51 AM
horizontal rule
36

79%/103, below average, but not as far below as I would have thought. However, several of the "no" answers I picked up on simply by recognizing that the name hadn't flown by me before. (Forex, I don't think there was a single Irish name in the first group, and there were several in the second go-around).


Posted by: Tom Scudder | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 8:51 AM
horizontal rule
37

16: I had a weird interaction with a TSA agent not long ago. She kept looking at my ID and saying things like "this doesn't look like you. This is you? I can see a little resemblance. You're not trying to get by with your older brother's ID, are you?" At first I thought she was bored and just bantering, but it went on for long enough that it seemed like she was actually suspicious that I was using someone else's ID. Then she shrugged and let me through.


Posted by: essear | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 8:52 AM
horizontal rule
38

Not falling for this one. I have plenty of better ways to torture myself if I want to do that.


Posted by: Nathan Williams | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 8:55 AM
horizontal rule
39

So 79% correct is a bit below the median, but 88% is in the top quartile. Surprisingly narrow range of variation.


Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 8:56 AM
horizontal rule
40

39: it's too easy. One of the big problems with it.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 9:03 AM
horizontal rule
41

That's easy? Jesus. Like I said, the study phase nearly gave me a heart attack.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 9:10 AM
horizontal rule
42

If anyone happens to be reading here who pseudonymously works in a lab that studies this stuff, is the celebrity recognition test I mentioned in 33 something you know about? And is there an explanation for why that wasn't hard for me?


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 9:11 AM
horizontal rule
43

Let me tell you if you like like my mother!


Posted by: Leon | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 9:12 AM
horizontal rule
44

41: but you still got, what, 75% of them right. That's a badly designed psychological measure. If you were really that bad you should have been close to 50%.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 9:12 AM
horizontal rule
45

To this day, I have no idea who is Bill Paxton and who is Bill Pullman.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 9:12 AM
horizontal rule
46

The big thing I learned from previous recognition tests is that I can't look at large numbers of faces in a short amount of time without becoming so uncomfortable that rather than try to figure out if I recognize a face, I just want to stop. It only just occurred to me that this fits with my uncomfortableness when I'm by myself in groups of people in crowded places.

Also, if a magazine cover has someone's face on it and the cover is facing up and it's constantly visible from where I'm sitting, at some point if I sit long enough I'll turn it over to stop from feeling stared at. But maybe that's a different problem.


Posted by: fake accent | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 9:17 AM
horizontal rule
47

45: Bill Paxton was Hudson in Aliens. Bill Pullman was the president in Independence Day.

If you're going to be fighting aliens, Bill Pullman is probably the one you want on your side.


Posted by: AcademicLurker | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 9:19 AM
horizontal rule
48

46.1 gets it right. Is there a difference in long term and short term facial recognition capacities? I do okay on these tests, but in real life when it's someone I haven't seen in a while, particularly if they're out of context, I'm pathetic.


Posted by: Eggplant | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 9:20 AM
horizontal rule
49

I know Bill Paxton was the vocalist for late-80s Devo-esque pop band Martini Ranch. And Bill Pullman was not. But somehow this does not connect to a knowledge of which one of them was the actor in any of their movies.


Posted by: Cryptic ned | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 9:21 AM
horizontal rule
50

Another for 46.1. Someone trying to psychologically torture me could do a lot of damage by just making me look at pictures of faces for a long time.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 9:22 AM
horizontal rule
51

Now I want to watch Lake Placid again. When Betty White leads the cow into the lake, that was one of the great moments of cinema.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 9:24 AM
horizontal rule
52

46, 48, 50: you might find this interesting. Generally, looking directly at somebody causes massive amygdala activation; there is an argument that hyperactivity in the amygdala is what drives aversion to eye contact in people on the autism spectrum.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 9:28 AM
horizontal rule
53

"I know your eyes are up there, but looking at them would cause massive amygdala activation."


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 9:31 AM
horizontal rule
54

Just watch that entire episode of Going Deep! It's on Hulu and it is very enjoyable! Everyone watch Going Deep now!


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 9:34 AM
horizontal rule
55

I feel so vindicated for calling LB a robot all these years.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 9:45 AM
horizontal rule
56

47: further to that, Bill Paxton has the unique distinction of having been killed by a Predator, an Alien and a Terminator.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 9:46 AM
horizontal rule
57

Bill Paxton was Hudson in Aliens. Bill Pullman was the president Lone Starr in Independence Day Spaceballs.


Posted by: Josh | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 9:48 AM
horizontal rule
58

55: I'd come out there and beat you up for that, but of course I have no possible way of figuring out who you are.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 9:49 AM
horizontal rule
59

57 is, regretfully, far more helpful to me than previous attempts.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 9:50 AM
horizontal rule
60

54 is true, but is not incompatible with watching the 3 minute segment in 52 additionally or in advance. If you're the kind of person who watches videos on the internet, of course.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 9:51 AM
horizontal rule
61

Ogged, for your sake I hope there are other people with your name and yours is one of the later entries in your local phone book.


Posted by: Eggplant | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 9:51 AM
horizontal rule
62

56: That's pretty great.


Posted by: AcademicLurker | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 9:52 AM
horizontal rule
63

I naturally can't deny 60.


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 9:52 AM
horizontal rule
64

If you're going to be fighting aliens, Bill Pullman is probably the one you want on your side.

Fucking A, man. I'm getting short Four more weeks and out. I don't want to die on this fucking rock. I mean game over, man! Game over! What the fuck are we gonna do now? What are we gonna do?


Posted by: Opinionated Private First Class William Hudson | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 9:54 AM
horizontal rule
65

62: in, respectively, Aliens ("Game over, man!"), Predator 2 and Terminator. He may have survived Terminator - he's one of the punks who gets beaten up by the Terminator at the start of the film - but he probably didn't have a good day.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 9:54 AM
horizontal rule
66

I'd probably recognize ogged.


Posted by: fake accent | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 10:03 AM
horizontal rule
67

Oh, I probably would too, unless you put him in a room with another tall skinny guy with medium-brown skin, a big nose, and eyelashes like Bambi. Within that category of people, I'd be picking at random.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 10:05 AM
horizontal rule
68

I'm much whiter since I moved back to the midwest. It's like camouflage.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 10:10 AM
horizontal rule
69

Those of us who put in an email address to take the retention test tomorrow can post those results then. I bet it'll be a lot harder.


Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 10:11 AM
horizontal rule
70

Oh, being less tan than when I met you? That's cheating, and nullifies any obligation I have to recognize anyone. See also clauses covering haircuts, facial hair, hats, and changes in style of clothing.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 10:12 AM
horizontal rule
71

Just to rag on the test in the OP a little more, you'll note that skin tone, haircut, facial hair, hat and clothing style are all mechanisms that could be deployed to succeed at the task. Even things like "note color of background" or "note average brightness of image" would work.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 10:17 AM
horizontal rule
72

My contract reserves the right to freak the fuck out if you put on a hat.


Posted by: Opinionated Parrot | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 10:23 AM
horizontal rule
73

The oggeds that couldn't blend with the lighter colored bark of trees in the midwest were eaten by birds.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 10:25 AM
horizontal rule
74

Speaking of Bill Paxton, I just watched the series finale of Big Love. It totally jumped the shark and I'm still all weepy anyway.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 10:25 AM
horizontal rule
75

74: Did you think it jumped the shark right at the end or, oh, about Season 2 or so? That show suffered from not seeming to realize that Bill Henrickson was basically a bad person who didn't deserve to succeed in his cunning plans and crazy capers.


Posted by: Yawnoc | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 10:30 AM
horizontal rule
76

75: I think the show's writers were pretty clear on the fact that Bill wasn't all that bright, at least. I thought the ending was essentially a fantasy wrapped in a bow for the viewer. The anti-Sopranos ending.


Posted by: Tia | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 10:39 AM
horizontal rule
77

I thought it jumped the shark abruptly in Season 4, with [spoilers?] his political ambitions. I didn't necessarily think of him as a good or bad person - not a duplicitous person, takes all types to make a world go round, etc.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 10:42 AM
horizontal rule
78

Agree with 77. I gave up during Season 4. Now I can't remember whether I saw the finale or not.


Posted by: Robert Halford | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 10:44 AM
horizontal rule
79

And I checked the recap of the last episode and, no, I hadn't. Oh well. Spoilers!


Posted by: Robert Halford | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 10:45 AM
horizontal rule
80

pretty clear on the fact that Bill wasn't all that bright, at least.

Although he gained miracle brains in the last season, with all these extemporaneous speeches and volumes of facts on the tips of his fingers.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 10:48 AM
horizontal rule
81

The reason I though he was a bad person was because he took all kinds of crazy risks and hurt all kinds of people out of, basically, greed, horniness and egotism, and always managed to rationalize it as God's Plan.


Posted by: Yawnoc | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 10:53 AM
horizontal rule
82

Heavenly Father wants him to sleep around, Yawny.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 10:56 AM
horizontal rule
83

I cannot imagine trying to be married to someone who claims to receive "testimonies" that are absolutely rigid and immutable.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 10:57 AM
horizontal rule
84

But, eh, they seem to love each other.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 10:57 AM
horizontal rule
85

It's fun trying to have an argument about that show when I now only half-remember it. Mostly I just remember thinking all the time what an incredibly good set up for a TV show the polygamous family turned out to be. Also I don't remember thinking Bill was extremely evil, just normal-guy evil, though they also had the affirmatively evil compound dwellers to make him look better. Until he became a politician, which was just boring and stupid.


Posted by: Robert Halford | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 11:03 AM
horizontal rule
86

I don't think you're wrong, Yawnoc, I guess I just think the writers were pretty clear on how egotistical and self-deluded he was. He benefits from contrast with the people on the compound, but that just demonstrated that there weren't a ton of great choices, for Nicki especially. Halford has it right, I think. I think the show is pretty explicit that Barb has lots of justification for deep resentment of Bill for talking her into that shit while she had cancer and felt very vulnerable, even though she loves her sister-wives and in the end they're the family that will really sustain her. That's why I say the ending's a gift to the viewer.


Posted by: Tia | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 11:14 AM
horizontal rule
87

I will say that Sons of Anarchy has just gotten beyond embarrassing and stupid recently,even for me, even if it was always in the dumb but fun zone. "Torture porn, ludicrously over-complex ethnic gang dispute skillfully manipulated to keep lead character alive, random bikini babe, evil Mom is evil, dudes ride bikes, torture porn, dudes ride bikes, extremely long montage shot with people looking profoud, show is still going on, dudes ride bikes, torture porn."


Posted by: Robert Halford | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 11:14 AM
horizontal rule
88

86.last: Having read the last sentence of the plot summary in the Wikipedia page, I don't get why.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 11:31 AM
horizontal rule
89

Oh god, I nearly panicked like LB. Still got a 109/84%, which is stunning to me. If you had shown me a picture of one of the people without a name and asked me to supply a name, I would have gotten a 0. Will report back tomorrow on the long-term memory, but I guarantee you my results will drop substantially in comparison to the norm.


Posted by: Chopper | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 11:40 AM
horizontal rule
90

The end of Big Love is very similar to the end of (SPOILERS) Breaking Bad in some ways. I don't know if it's kosher to delve into it, but in both cases I think the writers let their protagonists off the hook a bit too easily.


Posted by: Yawnoc | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 11:45 AM
horizontal rule
91

I'm waiting for Thanksgiving break before I read the Breaking Bad entry in Wikipedia. It's nice to have holiday entertainment.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 11:53 AM
horizontal rule
92

86: Okay, boy, am I procrastinating today, and it's fun to talk about prestige television:

The show (now lots of spoilers) wasn't going to rub its hands together and cackle at Bill's death. He loved his family; his family loved him. He wasn't the villain, but he wasn't a hero either, and for all the wives periodically recited how much they owed to him, it's pretty obvious he caused a lot of their problems, it was just that what he offered was better than death/rape and enslavement/being a child with an alcoholic mother, respectively. Showing him as a ghost, only able to mutely express love, but with no ability to interfere in Nicki, Marge, and Barb's relationship and lives is, like, everything you could have wanted for those three. Grief over Bill's death, especially after he "grants" Barb the authority she richly deserves, is satisfyingly sentimental, but does anyone watch the ending and think, oh, noes, what will they ever do without him? His death basically leaves everyone better off, it protects the family from his idiot feuding, and you get to see the sister-wives in a warm, uncompetitive, peaceful intimacy it was hard for them to achieve while they were under his thumb and subject to his schemes. No one is shown overwhelmed by grief, IIRC.

I thought the show was great, in part because it portrayed this intensely patriarchal family in a warm, humane, and complicated way. They love and support each other and their dynamics are really messed up, which is like a lot of families, but it's obvious and explicit that the patriarchy part isn't positive, though the large net of caring relationships is. If anything I thought the ending was too neat and happy.


Posted by: Tia | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 11:54 AM
horizontal rule
93

Lb you are my sister. Right down to the rising panic at all these faces. if only we could recognise one another!

I have just come away from a party where I was tortured by failing to know the name of someone I have known and intermittently worked with for twelve years. I recognised her face, you see. So the name was inaccessible. Only now that the train is twenty miles from her do I remember the name without effort or strain


Posted by: Nworb Werdna | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 12:39 PM
horizontal rule
94

I just clicked the link and took the test. I don't really get it. You could pass by remembering either faces or names or some combination thereof; it has nothing to do with associating the right name to the right face. I got 98%. On the other hand, I recently didn't recognize someone I've known for years. To be fair, he was wearing big sunglasses.


Posted by: essear | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 12:59 PM
horizontal rule
95

Oops. I got 96% right, which was 98th percentile. I forgot what they said that was as a score. 124 or 126 or something like that.


Posted by: essear | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 12:59 PM
horizontal rule
96

92: Is Big Love written by John Ringo or something?


Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 1:05 PM
horizontal rule
97

Wait, this Going Deep thing you guys have been talking about is a TV show done by the same guy who did the artisanal pencil sharpening thing? I would not have guessed that pencil sharpening was a route to television stardom.


Posted by: essear | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 1:18 PM
horizontal rule
98

97: yeah. But before getting into pencil sharpening he also did super-acerbic anti-war comics so, you know how TV is.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 1:21 PM
horizontal rule
99

Although the TV show is really a natural outgrowth of the pencil sharpening so, yeah, go figure.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 1:22 PM
horizontal rule
100

There's someone I've been on a committee with for years. I know perfectly well that name is Alison, but the other day I introduced her to my wife saying "you remember Angela, don't you?' Is there a name for this kind of confusion, other than early-onset dementia?


Posted by: Basil Valentine | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 2:01 PM
horizontal rule
101

The artisanal pencil sharpening guy is the same guy as the Get Your War On guy? And now he has a TV show I've never heard of?


Posted by: Cryptic ned | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 2:06 PM
horizontal rule
102

Careers in the 21st century, man.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 2:06 PM
horizontal rule
103

Is he also the author of Fafblog, and hundreds of thousands of completely humorless, angry and condescending blog comments?


Posted by: Cryptic ned | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 2:06 PM
horizontal rule
104

I bought his pencil sharpening book as part of a sale by whatever small publishing house put it out, and they never sent it to me. But I didn't want to complain, because it's good to support small struggling incompetent businesses.


Posted by: Cryptic ned | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 2:09 PM
horizontal rule
105

104: Does that mean you are still using a pencil-sharpening service?


Posted by: peep | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 2:12 PM
horizontal rule
106

I remember all kinds of facts about people, and I usually recognize them, but I don't do well at recognizing faces on their own. I'm pretty terrible at describing people's emotions on the test where all you can see is the person's eyes, nose and a bit of the brow.


Posted by: Bostoniangirl | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 2:13 PM
horizontal rule
107

100:
I've got it, whatever it's called.


Posted by: idp | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 2:15 PM
horizontal rule
108

My father takes great pride in remembering names but is actually kind of bad at it, so is constantly, confidently looking people right in the eye and calling them by the wrong name. It's awkward.


Posted by: Yawnoc | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 2:21 PM
horizontal rule
109

103: Wait, hold on. Who's the purported author of Fafblog? stras?


Posted by: Yawnoc | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 2:22 PM
horizontal rule
110

109 -- believe it or not, it's Bob McManus.


Posted by: | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 2:40 PM
horizontal rule
111

Pencil-sharpening as a service.


Posted by: fake accent | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 2:52 PM
horizontal rule
112

110: I do not believe it.


Posted by: Yawnoc | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 3:07 PM
horizontal rule
113

I only agree with parts of 92. Nicki herself is, hands down, a total trainwreck, even though I mostly think believably so. (A bit of a self-parody near the end.) Marge is susceptible to Ponzi schemes and so on. Barb is kind of a saint, although realistic in that it makes her kind of unlikable. I agree they're probably better off without Bill, but only marginally so - how on earth are they supporting themselves?


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 3:10 PM
horizontal rule
114

Spoilers before.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 3:10 PM
horizontal rule
115

92 seems right to me. Don't they just divide up that sweet casino money from Bill once he's gone three ways? It does seem like there could be some interesting legal squabbles over the assets, which I'd be happy to write up in the most boring fan fiction ever.


Posted by: Robert Halford | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 3:13 PM
horizontal rule
116

112: According to the "About Fafnir" link on fafblog, you're Fafnir.


Posted by: Walt Someguy | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 3:13 PM
horizontal rule
117

the most boring fan fiction ever

Oh, man, it could be like the litigation equivalent of fantasy football. Fictional characters sue each other, all evidence has to be derived from what's in the show, and lawyers who are really into their day jobs brief the cases for fun.

Suddenly, erotic fan fiction seems normal and healthy.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 3:16 PM
horizontal rule
118

I definitely agree with the last paragraph of 92, though. As Halford said, it's a great premise for a show. They were so much fun to watch.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 3:21 PM
horizontal rule
119

Fictional characters sue each other, all evidence has to be derived from what's in the show, and lawyers who are really into their day jobs brief the cases for fun.

Oh God I can actually see this happening.


Posted by: Robert Halford | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 3:47 PM
horizontal rule
120

Add high schoolers & that's pretty much mock trial, speaking of which case packet supposed to be released today. Should check that.


Posted by: dairy queen | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 3:59 PM
horizontal rule
121

120, 93%, 93rd percentile!


Posted by: Natilo Paennim | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 5:23 PM
horizontal rule
122

Oh, man, it could be like the litigation equivalent of fantasy football.

You mean...Tugwater?

"testimonies" that are absolutely rigid and immutable

Might wanna get a biopsy if that's the case, gentlemenz.


Posted by: Natilo Paennim | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 5:39 PM
horizontal rule
123

I got 118, 91%. I'll do the long-term part tomorrow.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 9:12 PM
horizontal rule
124

As Tweety suggested in 14, I think they may actually be testing how memorable gender-consistent name-face pairs are compared to gender-inconsistent ones. There certainly were an awful lot of gender-ambiguous names, and a lot of fairly androgynous faces too.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 09-11-14 10:16 PM
horizontal rule
125

Oh, man, it could be like the litigation equivalent of fantasy football. Fictional characters sue each other, all evidence has to be derived from what's in the show, and lawyers who are really into their day jobs brief the cases for fun.

Jarndyce v. Jarndyce (Mary Sue intervening).


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 09-12-14 3:04 AM
horizontal rule
126

There is a rather hilarious satire of German legal writing style called Der Fall Struwwelpeter (The Case of Struwwelpeter), in which the author does something similar with the text of the stories in the children's book Struwwelpeter. There is a also a sequel using the Max und Moritz stories.

Instead of giving away his creative output for free, Halford could write a book like this and sell it. The perfect gift for the lawyer in your life who already has a copy of the book of New Yorker lawyer cartoons!


Posted by: knecht ruprecht | Link to this comment | 09-12-14 4:28 AM
horizontal rule
127

117, 119: Predictably, this sort of exists in DC. Every year the Shakespeare Theatre has a fundraiser where they get a bunch of SCt/DC Cir judges and a couple SCt bar all-stars to put on an argument over whether, e.g., Isabella can sue the Duke for Angelo's abuses of power. It's about as fun as it sounds.


Posted by: potchkeh | Link to this comment | 09-12-14 4:57 AM
horizontal rule
128

OK, I got the follow-up and did the second-day retention test. 79th percentile for short-term recognition, 43rd percentile for long-term. (71% correct, score 100.)


Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 09-12-14 9:24 AM
horizontal rule
129

On the second day I got a score of 138, in the 99th percentile, identifying 93% correctly. For a few of them I thought they were showing me faces that didn't come up in the study phase but did come up in the testing face on the first day, but I might have been wrong about that.


Posted by: essear | Link to this comment | 09-12-14 3:47 PM
horizontal rule
130

First day, 111, second day: 105. Holy cow, essear.


Posted by: Klug | Link to this comment | 09-12-14 4:11 PM
horizontal rule
131

Wow, I did way worse the second day. 101, 72%. I'm not entirely sober, though, which may have skewed the results a bit.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 09-12-14 9:21 PM
horizontal rule
132

I lasted about 6 faces. I'd rather do just about anything than take a test like that. You people scare me.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 09-12-14 9:35 PM
horizontal rule
133

After the second time I'm even more inclined to think that they're actually testing the effects of gender-neutral or gender-nonconforming names. It was really striking this time how many of them there were.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 09-12-14 9:37 PM
horizontal rule
134

The lab that seems to be behind it appears to focus more on language than on facial recognition per se, which strengthens my suspicions.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 09-12-14 9:51 PM
horizontal rule
135

Took follow up:
Score: 111
Percentile: 72
Percent correct: 78


Posted by: Natilo Paennim | Link to this comment | 09-13-14 4:25 PM
horizontal rule
136

So it just emailed me a third time to take the test again (not sure if this was an error or if they do want to test people three times) and I did. I did notably better than yesterday but worse than the day before: score of 111, 78% correct.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 09-13-14 9:14 PM
horizontal rule