Kaj_Sotala comments on Thinking Bayesianically, with Lojban - Less Wrong

11 Post author: DataPacRat 24 January 2012 06:47PM

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

Comments (66)

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

Comment author: Kaj_Sotala 25 June 2012 01:09:30PM 0 points [-]

I find the middle phrasing entirely unsatisfactory ("possible" is an obvious replacement)

"Possible" seems to have two distinct meanings. The first one fits your usage, but the other is more of a binary expression, used to express the fact that something is not impossible. In other words, anything whose probability is equal or greater than 1% (say) can be tagged with "possible", and using this sense of "possible" for the 46-55% range seems wrong - it would deserve a stronger word. To avoid the risk of confusion about which sense is meant, I suggest using something like "entirely possible".

Comment author: gwern 25 June 2012 02:31:14PM 0 points [-]

To me, 'entirely possible' doesn't convey around 50-50; so why bother sticking in an entire other word?