= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Lumifer comments on Group Rationality Diary, November 16-30 - 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 (40)
The issue is who can better predict what ilzolende's mom will think of cryonics, ilzolende who knows his mom, or me who has never met ilzolende's mom but who has talked to many women about cryonics. The chance of my being a better predictor is increasing in the number of women I have talked to about cryonics so while what I wrote didn't "contradict" what you said it does reduce the likelihood of your being right.
Nope. By increasing your sample size you are getting your sample mean and so your estimate of the true mean closer to the population mean. But you can never get better than the population mean in your forecast. Someone who knows how the specifics of a particular data point differ from the average/expected value is quite likely to produce a better forecast.