Jonathan_Graehl comments on Say More, Justify Less - Less Wrong

19 Post author: paulfchristiano 14 April 2011 10:41PM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (25)

Comments (25)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Jonathan_Graehl 15 April 2011 12:17:08AM 1 point [-]

we may learn that certain individuals are good at predicting the outcome of a focus group or A/B test. Peers can then predict the prediction of these individuals. This gives even faster feedback, and can free up time for that individual. Since the attention of people with accurate beliefs and good planning skills is very important, this is an important consideration.

Why do you expect this to happen?

I think you're saying that if some masterful predictors exist, then their casting a prediction will mostly determine the outcome, sufficient for lesser people to (with a little uncertainty) learn whether they predicted well.

Comment author: paulfchristiano 15 April 2011 01:35:05AM 1 point [-]

Why do you expect this to happen?

I suspect that for any given event, some people are better at predicting it than others. For example, in the case of UI design it is definitely the case that some people are much better than others at predicting what will do well in an A/B test. If such people are scarce, learning to predict their predictions is a good substitute for learning to predict the results of A/B tests themselves. (The real question in this situation is whether the overhead of prediction could be low enough for this to matter.)

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit