= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Vladimir_Nesov comments on The prior of a hypothesis does not depend on its complexity - 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 (59)
In the post, the word "hypothesis" is used to refer to events (which is the usual meaning in the context of Bayesian updating). They are not confused, you just didn't use the intended interpretation.
Then title "complexity of a hypothesis" makes no sense. Events ("hypotheses" in post) have no complexity. Descriptions ("hypotheses" in my comment) have complexity.
Connection is between complexity of descriptions and probability of events, and it has none of the problems described in the post.