= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
jmmcd comments on Kurzweil's predictions: good accuracy, poor self-calibration - 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 (39)
I dislike this scale. One could argue that "partially false" is better than "partially true".
replaced "partially" with "somewhat".
That doesn't really solve the problem. For clarity's sake, you probably ought use "mostly true" and "mostly false".
"Mostly" is too strong a qualifier.
If you're looking for something that means "more than half", then "mostly" is a good choice. If you're looking for something that means "less than half", then you have the problem that "<qualifier> true" means less true than "<qualifier> false".
try "roughly" maybe?
Going for "weakly true" and "weakly false".