= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
kalium comments on Open thread for January 1-7, 2014 - 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 (142)
But the "50% probability of Situation A (2% probability of FAI in 100 years) and 50% probability of Situation B (0% probability of FAI in 100 years)" is much more informative to the reader than "1% probability of FAI in 100 years." It exposes more about which parts of the estimate are pulled out of the writer's ass. If I know something the writer doesn't about any one of these component probabilities, I can update my own beliefs, or discuss the estimate, more usefully this way than if I'm just given a flat "1%."
Anna and Steve had a nice post about that.