= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Kevin comments on Open Thread: January 2010 - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (725)
They're almost made up, which makes any attempt at Bayesian analysis not all that meaningful... I'd welcome other tools. He gave me the 80% probability number so I felt obligated to give my own probability.
Consider the numbers to have very wide bounds, or to be more meaningful expressed in words -- he thinks there is a conspiracy, I don't think there is a conspiracy, but neither of us are absolutely confident about it.
Exactly. I think there is no rational basis for answering your question.
Your friend has a distrust of corporate leaders(here I agree with him) and his theory is probably based on his feeling of disgust for their practices. So his theory has probably more of an emotional basis than a rational one. That doesn't mean it is wrong, just there aren't any rational reasons for believing it.