= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Douglas_Knight comments on Probability, knowledge, and meta-probability - 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 (71)
I ask you for a different treatment, so you ask me for a similar treatment?
No, I don't see the point. Doesn't my request make sense, regardless of whether we agree on what is similar or different?
FWIW, I understood David to be requesting some specific examples of how members of the set "everyone else ever" handle this problem, which on your account is the same as how Jaynes handles it, in order to more clearly see the similarity you reference.
Thanks, yes! I.e. who is this "everyone else," and where do they treat it the same way Jaynes does? I'm not aware of any examples, but I have only a basic knowledge of probability theory.
It's certainly possible that this approach is common, but Jaynes wasn't ignorant, and he seemed to think it was a new and unusual and maybe controversial idea, so I kind of doubt it.
Also, I should say that I have no dog in this fight at all; I'm not advocating "Jaynes is the greatest thing since sliced bread", for example. (Although that does seem to be the opinion of some LW writers.)