I Tried Using AI to See My Future Baby's Face. It Got Weird
These apps are more entertaining than scientific, more likely offering comic relief during pregnancy than accuracy, because no one can ever predict what their baby will look like. The moment that parents and baby meet will continue to remain a beautiful surprise, no matter how good AI gets.
Zooey Liao/CNET
I'm extra curious about what AI will generate, given I'm in a same-sex relationship and we have options when choosing our genetic "other half." But for the sake of this example, I'm going to use a friend, who might be a potential donor.
My goal, as with my AI-crafted headshots, is to generate future baby pictures that don't look like cartoons.
AI baby pictures: AI Baby Generator app
I decided to test out the AI Baby Generator: FaceMaker app, as it came up a few times in my research. The features beyond the baby generator also sounded interesting -- you can transform ultrasound images into visual predictions, swap genders, create a family photo and generate baby names.
AI Baby Generator is free to download, with upgrade options for unlimited Pro features. It was developed by Wowoo AI and launched in November 2022. To test its full capabilities, I signed up for the free trial of Pro. It's $7 per week but I'll delete it after I use it so I'm not charged.
I went through my camera roll and picked seven photos of myself that I liked, where you could see my face. I cropped the photos to focus in on my face. I did the same for the three male photos.
When I started uploading photos, I received a notification that they would be uploaded to the servers for analysis but deleted immediately after processing.
You can pick the gender but I selected "surprise me," because we need a little mystery in our journey. You can also "customize your baby," which was an odd feature, so I stuck with the automatic preset -- which promised 91% accuracy.
The first result?
Screenshot by Amanda Smith/CNET
The app told me that the probability of a boy is 64%. I pressed Regenerate and Customize Your Baby to tweak the settings but the features were similar. I kept getting boys so I just selected "boy" for all of them, so I could easily compare.
AI did get my age wrong. Some of these photos were from a few years ago, so I uploaded one from last year when I was 35. It listed my age as 29. At least it's not telling me I'm of geriatric pregnancy age. Phew!
I wanted to see if I'd get similar photos with another AI baby app or if it was just random.
For reference, this was me as a child.
Courtesy of Amanda Smith/CNET
AI baby pictures: Cosplay app
I picked Cosplay for the second tool because it was a top option in the App Store. I used the free trial but if you're using it be sure to delete it before it expires, otherwise it's $13 per week.
When I input my first image, the app said it would take 24 minutes to generate the baby pics but it took only five minutes.
The results were wildly different. I didn't see myself in these images at all.
Screenshot by Amanda Smith/CNET
I tried with the next two images of me but it didn't get better. It was a whole lot of the same.
AI baby pictures: Make a Baby app
Disappointed by this second round, I wanted to try one more app to see if the third time's a charm. I went with the Make a Baby app. It's $5 per week, with no free trial.
And things got even worse. The app displayed the two genetic parents' faces in a way that cropped out everything below the nose, and it wouldn't let me adjust them -- and then it simply mashed up those adult faces onto an image of a baby. I have no words besides "Give me my $5 back."
Screenshot by Amanda Smith/CNET
Let's go back to the beginning, to AI Baby Generator, and test one more photo to see if I can get consistency with two different photos in the same model. But I got an error message this time. Was it a sign from the universe?
Should you bother with AI-generated baby pictures?
I was excited to try out these tools, especially to support our unique journey where we get to pick the genetic other half for our future child. It's an odd and overwhelming experience and these AI apps didn't necessarily make it easier.
The results either felt too similar or -- when the apps actually worked -- fake.
Do I think our baby will look like any of these photos? No, and I'm happy about it. I want to keep some semblance of surprise.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Entrepreneur
11 minutes ago
- Entrepreneur
Digital Dubai Launches World's First AI-Powered Emirati Family
You're reading Entrepreneur Middle East, an international franchise of Entrepreneur Media. In a groundbreaking move to humanize digital services and strengthen cultural identity, Digital Dubai has unveiled the world's first virtual AI-powered Emirati family. This initiative marks a pioneering step in the UAE's digital transformation strategy, blending artificial intelligence with local heritage to enhance public engagement. The debut began with the launch of "The Girl", the first family member introduced via a social media campaign. Clad in modernized traditional attire, the animated figure was designed to appeal to children and families alike. Digital Dubai invited the public to vote on her name—choosing between Dubai, Mira, and Latifa—fostering community participation from the outset. This virtual family will expand over time to include a father, mother, and brother, each character crafted to reflect authentic Emirati values. Beyond their visual appeal, these avatars are embedded with conversational AI, enabling them to communicate key government messages, explain services, and promote digital literacy in a friendly, relatable way. According to Digital Dubai, the goal is to "humanize digital communication" and make government services more accessible to residents of all ages and nationalities. The initiative aligns with Dubai's broader vision of using advanced technology to improve quality of life and strengthen civic engagement. What sets this initiative apart is its cultural sensitivity and strategic storytelling. By anchoring AI in the context of family—a deeply valued institution in Emirati society—Digital Dubai ensures that digital transformation resonates emotionally with its people. The family will serve not just as a communication tool, but as a symbol of modern Emirati identity in the digital age. As public engagement with "The Girl" continues to grow, anticipation builds for the remaining characters. This initiative sets a global benchmark for inclusive, culturally rooted digital governance—and confirms Dubai's role as a world leader in AI-driven innovation.
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Wordle hints today for #1,507: Clues and answer for Monday, August 4
Hey, there! Welcome to the start of a new week. We hope it's a joyful one for you. One thing that will help keep a lot of folks happy is extending their Wordle streaks. To that end, here's our daily Wordle guide with some hints and the answer for Monday's puzzle (#1,507). It may be that you're a Wordle newcomer and you're not completely sure how to play the game. We're here to help with that too. What is Wordle? Wordle is a deceptively simple daily word game that first emerged in 2021. There is one five-letter word to deduce every day by process of elimination. The daily word is the same for everyone. Wordle blew up in popularity in late 2021 after creator Josh Wardle made it easy for players to share an emoji-based grid with their friends and followers that detailed how they fared each day. The game's success spurred dozens of clones across a swathe of categories and formats. The New York Times purchased Wordle in early 2022 for an undisclosed sum. The publication said that players collectively played Wordle 5.3 billion times in 2024. So, it's little surprise that Wordle is one of the best online games and puzzles you can play daily. How to play Wordle To start playing Wordle, you simply need to enter one five-letter word. The game will tell you how close you are to that day's secret word by highlighting letters that are in the correct position in green. Letters that appear in the word but aren't in the right spot will be highlighted in yellow. If you guess any letters that are not in the secret word, the game will gray those out on the virtual keyboard. However, you can still use those letters in subsequent guesses. You'll only have six guesses to find each day's word, though you still can use grayed-out letters to help narrow things down. It's also worth remembering that letters can appear in the secret word more than once. Wordle is free to play on the NYT's website and apps, as well as on Meta Quest headsets and Discord. The game refreshes at midnight local time. If you log into a New York Times account, you can track your stats, including the all-important win streak. How to play Wordle more than once a day If you have a NYT subscription that includes full access to the publication's games, you don't have to stop after a single round of Wordle. You'll have access to an archive of more than 1,500 previous Wordle games. So if you're a relative newcomer, you'll be able to go back and catch up on previous editions. In addition, paid NYT Games members have access to a tool called the Wordle Bot. This can tell you how well you performed at each day's game. Previous Wordle answers Before today's Wordle hints, here are the answers to recent puzzles that you may have missed: Yesterday's Wordle answer for Sunday, August 3 — LUMPY Saturday, August 2 — DAUNT Friday, August 1 — BANJO Thursday, July 31 — FRILL Wednesday, July 30 — ASSAY Today's Wordle hints explained Every day, we'll try to make Wordle a little easier for you. First, we'll offer a hint that describes the meaning of the word or how it might be used in a phrase or sentence. We'll also tell you if there are any double (or even triple) letters in the word. In case you still haven't quite figured it out by that point, we'll then provide the first letter of the word. Those who are still stumped after that can continue on to find out the answer for today's Wordle. This should go without saying, but make sure to scroll slowly. Spoilers are ahead. Today's Wordle help Here is a hint for today's Wordle answer: Adjective for something stiff and inflexible, such as a refusal to compromise. Are there any double letters in today's Wordle? There is a pair of repeated letters in today's Wordle answer. What's the first letter of today's Wordle? The first letter of today's Wordle answer is R. The Wordle answer today This is your final warning before we reveal today's Wordle answer. No take-backs. Don't blame us if you happen to scroll too far and accidentally spoil the game for yourself. What is today's Wordle? Today's Wordle answer is... RIGID Not to worry if you didn't figure out today's Wordle word. If you made it this far down the page, hopefully you at least kept your streak going. And, hey: there's always another game tomorrow.
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The New York Times thinks generative AI is like Pac-Man ghosts and also the Matrix, because nobody gets to be normal about this stuff anymore
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. The New York Times is being hazed by game dev social media over what I can only describe as one of the most naive articles about AI I've ever seen. The pointing and laughing is happening on BlueSky, among other places, over a paragraph that claims generative AI is being embraced by the videogame industry, which sure, makes sense, because we were giving those funny Pac-Man ghosts AIs in the past. And isn't that the same thing? No. No it's not—though being wary of simply taking a lone paragraph out of context, I went ahead and read the full thing. It does not get much better. Get out your bingo cards. The piece immerses us into a nice balmy pot of misunderstanding soup with the sentence "It sounds like a thought experiment conjured by René Descartes for the 21st century." Hoo boy. Its writer, Zachary Small, then goes on to reference this video that went viral a couple of years ago, wherein a YouTuber gets proportionately freaked out as generative AI NPCs start getting a bit existential in a tech demo by Replica. I'd link to Replica's website, but the company doesn't exist anymore which, to be fair, the article does acknowledge several paragraphs down. The NYT frames this as some kind of brush with the machine god: "Everything was fake, a player told them through a microphone, and they were simply lines of code meant to embellish a virtual world. Empowered by generative artificial intelligence like ChatGPT, the characters responded in panicked disbelief. 'What does that mean,' said one woman in a gray sweater. 'Am I real or not?'" This sort of open-mouthed astonishment might've been apropos three years ago, when all of this tech was still relatively new, but AI doesn't actually think or understand anything. It didn't then, and it doesn't now. Here's a solid breakdown by MIT from the time period, which explains: "In this huge corpus of text, words and sentences appear in sequences with certain dependencies. This recurrence helps the model understand how to cut text into statistical chunks that have some predictability. It learns the patterns of these blocks of text and uses this knowledge to propose what might come next." In other words, what we might call an 'educated guess'. Replica's AI was trained on text written by people, and people have written about machines becoming self-aware before, which is why the NPCs spat out lines about being self-aware when they were told they were machines. This is like saying Google is sapient because it fed me a link to Isaac Asimov's I, Robot when I searched for it: A program taking educated guesses does not a singularity make. To be clear, generative AI has been having a major impact on videogames—both in the fact that there are legitimate use-cases being found, and in the fact that excitable CEOs are getting ahead of themselves and mandating employees use it, which is totally a normal thing you do with a technology you're naturally finding use cases for. The paragraph that active developers are dunking on, however, is this doozy: "Most experts acknowledge that a takeover by artificial intelligence is coming for the video game industry within the next five years, and executives have already started preparing to restructure their companies in anticipation. After all, it was one of the first sectors to deploy AI programming in the 1980s, with the four ghosts who chase Pac-Man each responding differently to the player's real-time movements." I'm just gonna rattle off the problems with this statement one-by-one. First up, which experts? Sure, Nvidia's CEO says AI is coming for everybody's jobs, but also, it's sort of his job to sell AI technology. You know who else said we'd all have to adapt to AI? Netflix's former VP of GenAI for Games, who stopped working there four months later. CEO of Larian Studios Swen Vincke (note: someone who actually makes games) isn't nearly as convinced—while the developer does use generative AI for the early, early stages of prototyping, basically anything thereafter is made by hand. CD Projekt is also steering clear, because the quagmire of legal ownership just isn't worth it. Some executives have done some restructuring that may or may not be related to AI—I certainly don't doubt that AI plays a part, but widespread layoffs and studio closures are also down to, say, buying a company for $68 billion, or flubbing a $2 billion investment deal. You know. CEO things. And then there's the coup de grâce on this lump of coal—the comparison to the ghosts in Pac-Man, as if that has anything to do with anything. No, the programming of Pac-Man's ghosts has nothing to do with generative AI or deep learning models, a completely different technology. Tōru Iwatani, a person, gave them their distinct 'personalities'. "We're gonna be making our games differently, but to say that it'll replace the craftsmanship? I think we're very far from it." Larian CEO Swen Vincke (GameSpot interview, April 2025) To be clear, this is about as relevant as saying the videogame industry's adopting AI because Crazy Taxi had a pointing arrow in it that leads to your next objective—it's a loose association by someone who saw the word "AI" twice and assumed those things must be related. I could continue ribbing on this thing. For example, there's a one-two punch where Small references fretting over gen AI npcs "dying" when a game gets shut down as developers "forgoing those moral questions in their presentations to studio executives," then proceeds to talk about how Sony made an AI Aloy without also noting that the character's voice actor, Ashley Burch, found the whole thing repulsive. It also happens to suggest that using "AI programs to complete repetitive tasks like placing barrels throughout a virtual village" is novel, when procedural generations have existed for years (and in fact might be a more apt comparison, if we're going to draw a line from point A to point B). But I think what's really telling is how noncommittal the answers Small receives are. Microsoft's response was the most gung-ho, though it still clarified that "Game creators will always be the center of our overall AI efforts". Nintendo pointed Small in the direction of its prior statements, wherein the company said "would rather go in a different direction". Even the experts at companies Small quotes are downright tepid, often pointing towards cost and realistic expectations for the things he says are just five years around the corner. Look—generative AI's gonna have, and already has had, an impact on game development, and will be used inside of it. But I would implore both the writers at the NYT, and just about anyone else, to apply a little bit of skepticism before you believe claims that these models are forming relationships, inventing art styles, or becoming self-aware. That's not how this works. That's not how any of this works.
