Douglas_Knight comments on The Irrationality Game - Less Wrong

38 Post author: Will_Newsome 03 October 2010 02:43AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (910)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: [deleted] 03 October 2010 07:34:17PM 5 points [-]

How detailed of a model are you thinking of? It seems like there are at least easy and somewhat trivial predictions we could make e.g. that a human will eat chocolate instead of motor oil.

Comment author: dyokomizo 03 October 2010 07:47:20PM 3 points [-]

I would classify such kinds of predictions as vague, after all they match equally well for every human being in almost any condition.

Comment author: Douglas_Knight 04 October 2010 12:37:16AM *  3 points [-]

I think "vague" is a poor word choice for that concept. "(not) informative" is a technical term with this meaning. There are probably words which are clearer to the layman.

Comment author: dyokomizo 04 October 2010 12:41:50AM 1 point [-]

I agree vague is not a good word choice. Irrelevant (using relevancy as it's used to describe search results) is a better word.