gwern comments on No peace in our time? - Less Wrong

9 Post author: Stuart_Armstrong 26 May 2015 02:41PM

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

Comments (38)

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

Comment author: gwern 29 May 2015 09:23:55PM 3 points [-]

The available data must support some range of ks, some precision, and if allowing any shift of k over time indicates that k has fallen a lot lately, that's pretty bad for their theory. If they say you should ignore the data, then they're doing theology.

Comment author: ChristianKl 30 May 2015 12:15:47AM 1 point [-]

The point is range of ks is quite large. That's what Taleb's work as a professor of Risk Engineering is about.

Comment author: gwern 30 May 2015 01:36:11AM 2 points [-]

If the range of ks is large then the posterior probability of a shift (or to put it another way, the estimated probability that pre-WWII ks differ from post-WWII ks) will be appropriately small and Taleb will have demonstrated what he wants to demonstrate without so much rhetoric and an analysis that largely misses the point.