You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

SanguineEmpiricist comments on Open Thread, May 4 - May 10, 2015 - Less Wrong Discussion

3 Post author: Gondolinian 04 May 2015 12:06AM

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

Comments (215)

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

Comment author: SanguineEmpiricist 07 May 2015 06:30:27PM *  -2 points [-]

calm down and stop arguing about someone using the word zero in a hyperbolic fashion.

Then we can merely respond to whatever range of the interval you think the utilities are. Read this

http://www.bayesianrisk.com/sample_chapters/Chapter%201%20There%20is%20more%20to%20assessing%20risk%20than%20statistics.pdf

http://www.bayesianrisk.com/sample_chapters/Chapter%202%20The%20need%20for%20causal%20explanatory%20models%20in%20risk%20assessment.pdf

or Risk - A Multidisciplinary Introduction all emphasize non-statistical risk measures. It doesn't matter whether it's zero or not.

"We discuss a simplified view of risk assessment and do not cover decision and utility theory except in passing and to make the point that such theory is not enough without coherent models of the problem situation. Most other books try to present decision the- ory and risk all at once and in a very mathematical way; this can be rather overwhelming."

Alright?

You're not adding any information

False. I have given further resources and people have not talked about them. Not every one is passive.