lessdazed comments on A History of Bayes' Theorem - Less Wrong

53 Post author: lukeprog 29 August 2011 07:04AM

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

Comments (85)

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

Comment author: endoself 26 August 2011 01:25:13AM *  8 points [-]

I think this is due to Yudkowsky's focus on AI theory; an AI can't use discretion to choose the right method unless we formalize this discretion. Bayes' theorem is applicable to all inference problems, while frequentist methods have domains of applicability. This may seem philosophical to working statisticians - after all, Bayes' theorem is rather inefficient for many problems, so it may still be considered inapplicable in this sense - but programming an AI to use a frequentist method without a complete understanding of its domain of applicability could be disastrous, while that problem just does not exist for Bayesianism. There is the problem of choosing a prior, but that can be dealt with by using objective priors or Solomonoff induction.

Comment author: lessdazed 26 August 2011 07:37:57AM 2 points [-]

programming an AI to use a frequentist method without a complete understanding of its domain of applicability could be disastrous

I'm not sure what you meant by that, but as far as I can tell not explicitly using Bayesian reasoning makes AIs less functional, not unfriendly.

Comment author: endoself 26 August 2011 06:03:41PM 1 point [-]

Yes, mostly that lesser meaning of disastrous, though an AI that almost works but has a few very wrong beliefs could be unfriendly. If I misunderstood your comment and you were actually asking for an example of a frequentist method failing, one of the simplest examples is a mistaken assumption of linearity.