George_Weinberg2 comments on My Bayesian Enlightenment - Less Wrong

25 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 05 October 2008 04:45PM

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

Comments (57)

Sort By: Old

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: George_Weinberg2 05 October 2008 08:04:44PM 1 point [-]

Cat Dancer,

The frequentist answer of 1/3 is effectively making the implicit assumption that the parent would have said "at least one boy" either if both were boys or if there were one of each, and "at least one girl" if both were girls. Eliezer2008's 1/2 answer effectively assumes that the parent would have said "at least one boy" if both were boys, "at least one girl" if both were girls, and either with equal probability if there were one of each. "No alternative" assumes the parent is constrained to (truthfully) say either "at least one boy" or "at least one girl", an assumption that strikes me as being bizzare.

Will Pearson, you could not be more wrong. Winning money at games of chance is precisely what probability theory was designed for.