[onemorepassword]

It's worrying how this keeps getting upvoted despite having been debunked before it even hit HN, and the top comments on both HN and the original post pointing to the article that debunks it.

This is one scenario in which HN could really use downvotes.

[PavlovsCat]

For me it doesn't really make a huge difference if plastic surgery or photoshop are the culprit. So these women don't actually all look like clones, they're just presented as clones; great.

[hkmurakami]

That's actually a really interesting point about the cultural backdrop of the photos being produced.

[PavlovsCat]

I think many small changes - each of them incremental, and rather innocent in and of itself - to maximize "market appeal" (where the market is some kind of faceless statistical blob), can also lead to this. If you don't know what you're doing and why you're doing it, and/or if it's not something you really can believe in, it will show, in some form or another.

Sure, I can't blame anyone for not believing in their job of photoshopping fashion pics.. but what I find much more unsettling is that young people do get influenced by this stuff, wether they know/want it or not, and wether the people pushing the stuff believe in it themselves or not. But it's not just fashion, our societies are half-assing a lot of things on a massive scale. Too many hustlers, too little pride in work :(

[anywhichway]

I thought the whole point of the post was the analyses and methods and that the outcome was of little importance, but was only there to make the subject more interesting, gripping, and relevant.