Monday, April 3, 2017

The 70s Were Awesome. Now There's Proof!

Of course, we've always known that the 70s defined awesomeness, but now there is absolute, scientific, irrefutable proof.  You see, there is a website called that tells you the probability of a particular picture being awesome.  So, naturally, I had to try this out on some of our favorite Big Book catalog pics from the 70s. And the results? Well, they were pretty gosh darn awesome!

Take this pic of High Rise Pants from last week.  This site's highly sophisticated AI neural net software rates this pic at 73.8% chance of being awesome.  Not bad, not bad at all! (1)

Wow!! What the heck happened here?  You can't tell me that this awesome pic only mustered a 14.0% rating.  Somehow I think this software needs a little more tweaking...

A 99.9% score!  Wow!!

Oh come on!! That score simply must be an error.  How can this pic be called anything but "awesome?"

Well that's better.  At least we're trending in the right direction!

Yep, can't argue about that score!!  Any pic that combines a guy in a three piece suit, Kathy, and a hatchet has to get a high awesomeness score!

Apparently 70s maternity wear was pretty freaking awesome according to the software!!

Well I can't say that I know why the AI spit out this ridiculously low number.  I mean you have Kathy, Karen, and Colleen (in mini skirts no less).  Perhaps the program has something against smoking hot women?!?

Nah, that theory just got shot down.  A 95.5% probability of awesomeness despite the poor picture quality!!

CAUTION:  I must warn you, gentle readers,  Please, PLEASE, do NOT use a picture of yourself in the software.  Unless you are a model like these fine ladies here, the results are somewhat depressing (trust me, I know!!)

We've looked at group pictures.  What about individual shots??
Did you really expect anything else for Kathy??  We've seen a couple of 99.9% scores.  Is it even possible to get a perfect 100%?

Yes, yes it is.  At least if your name is Kathy Loghry.  For the rest of us, well, the numbers are probably a tad bit lower!!

There you have it friends!  Solid, concrete, scientific proof of the awesomeness of the 70s.  Well at least the Big Book catalog models of the 70s!!


(1) Full disclosure here.  I have worked with neural net software in the past and wasn't terribly impressed.  They are highly dependent on the data set that is used to "train" them.  I have no idea how this software was developed.  However, I have noticed that this AI tends to be a bit, well, ahem, sexist??

1 comment: