= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Sewing-Machine comments on Taking Ideas Seriously - 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 (257)
Now P(Sewing-Machine is a phony) = ?
Here's another personal example of Bayesianism in action. Do you have a sense of how much you updated by? P(Richard Dawkins praises Steven Pinker | EP is bunk)/ P(Richard Dawkins praises Steven Pinker | EP is not bunk) is .5? .999? Any idea?
P("Sewing Machine" is a nym) = 1.0
P(Sewing Machine has been disingenuous) = 0.5 and rising
P(Dawkins praises Pinker|EP is not bunk) is ill defined because
P(EP is not bunk) = ~0
but I have updated P(Dawkins believes EP is not bunk) to at least 0.5
I don't know what "disingenuous" means.