= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Matt_Simpson comments on 'An objective defense of Bayesianism' - Less Wrong Discussion
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 (5)
Yes, basically they're saying given some reasonable (at least to them) assumptions about what an accuracy measure should look like, the only acceptable measure is quadratic.
They make some arbitrary assumptions about how to represent the space of possible worlds and degrees of belief, and it isn't clear if their result depends on these assumptions (they acknowledge this).