alex_zag_al comments on Bayes Slays Goodman's Grue - Less Wrong

0 Post author: potato 17 November 2011 10:45AM

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

Comments (120)

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

Comment author: alex_zag_al 18 November 2011 12:08:12AM *  0 points [-]

A successful prediction does not weaken a hypothesis.

Also, your argument works just as well for G as for g; therefore, a green emerald is evidence against emeralds being green and against emeralds being grue.

You made an arithmetic mistake. I figured you might want to try and find it yourself, and reasoned: if you do want to be told, you can just ask, but if I had assumed you wanted to be told and was wrong, I couldn't untell you.

The assumption that P(O) is P(G) + P(g) is also incorrect; there is also the hypothesis that half the emeralds are green, for example. But either way you shouldn't end up with P(g|O) < P(g).

Comment author: wedrifid 18 November 2011 01:01:40AM 2 points [-]

A successful prediction does not weaken a hypothesis.

It can weaken it relative to a competing hypothesis.