Re:Face retouching settings should be off by default
by scarmig on Sunday October 04, 2020 @05:35PM
(#24682440)
An interesting conundrum: if some apps automatically apply beauty filters and others don't, over time the ones that do could outcompete those that don't, even if it's to society's collective detriment. "The default camera on the Pixel is so bad, I always look so ugly in it!"
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Face retouching settings should be off by default
by michaelbuckbee on Sunday October 04, 2020 @07:43PM
(#24683159)
This has happened in the fashion industry where there is size "inflation" as sizes don't correspond to physical measurements.
Size 5 in Brand A is tight so consumers prefer Brand B who has size 5 clothes that fit better.
Re:Face retouching settings should be off by default
by crooked-v on Sunday October 04, 2020 @09:38PM
(#24683799)
This kind of thing is why I'm happy that mens' clothes often use actual inch measurements rather than abstract 'sizes'.
Re:Face retouching settings should be off by default
by humbledrone on Sunday October 04, 2020 @10:14PM
(#24683948)
At least for popular brands of jeans, the "inch" measurements have succumbed to the exact same nonsense: https://www.esquire.com/style/mens-fashion/a8386/pants-size-...
Re:Face retouching settings should be off by default
by dane-pgp on Sunday October 04, 2020 @11:09PM
(#24684217)
That article was written in 2010, but I can't help agreeing with its conclusion:
"But vanity waist sizing is so entrenched, it couldn't possibly be changed overnight, at least not without a government mandate. The only solution seems to be a gradual, year-by-year shaving of quarter-inch by quarter-inch until, in 2021, men's pants finally correspond with the label numbers — conveniently just in time for the New World Order's switch to mandatory full jumpsuits."
That sounds terrible, but it could still be an improvement over 2020.