= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Arran_Stirton comments on A (very) tentative refutation of Pascal's mugging - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (34)
Because its likes/dislikes not votes. The number of dislikes is greater than number of likes by 1. That being said, as the estimate of bias in coin increases, so does your likehood of future throws being HHHHH. Not sure I understand what is your point.
Hover over the thumbs-up / thumbs-down icons, they say "Vote up" and "Vote down". Anyway I was wondering what it was that I'd said that was wrong and thus deserved to be voted down.
Yes, I agree. However what I was trying to point out is that if you start off with no evidence of the coin being biased then you estimate of the bias won’t increase before you start flipping coins.
By the same merits, your estimate of how likely it is the mugger will kill x number of people won’t change because every person he kills is evidence toward him killing them all successfully as you're making the prediction before he does anything. If you read the above comments I believe it makes sense in context.
We have a saying in Russian, along the lines of ' the wall of a shed says [certain swearword common in graffiti, refers to a reproductive organ] but this body part is not present inside the shed ' . edit: anyhow, i kind of don't see anything wrong about what you said.