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.

Lumifer comments on [Link] A rational response to the Paris attacks and ISIS - Less Wrong Discussion

-1 Post author: Gleb_Tsipursky 23 November 2015 01:47AM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (275)
Tags: politics news intentionalinsights wordspreading raisingsanitywaterline rationality

Comments (275)

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

Comment author: Lumifer 24 November 2015 09:48:47PM 1 point [-]

the goal is to convey to a broad audience that they can do probabilistic estimates, too.

But can they do good probabilistic estimates? A little knowledge is a dangerous thing...

Comment author: Gleb_Tsipursky 24 November 2015 09:58:32PM 2 points [-]

I'd prefer they do some than not at all. Then, they would improve over time, as research by Tetlock and others shows.

Comment author: Lumifer 24 November 2015 10:02:31PM *  1 point [-]

I'd prefer they do some than not at all.

I'd prefer they first figure out the limits of their competence before starting to act on their Fermi estimates. And Tetlock's sample is not quite general public.

Comment author: Gleb_Tsipursky 24 November 2015 10:28:11PM 2 points [-]

I guess we have different preferences. I'd rather that people experiment and learn by doing.

Comment author: Lumifer 25 November 2015 03:14:54AM 1 point [-]

Whether experimenting is a good thing depends on the cost of failure.

Comment author: VoiceOfRa 26 November 2015 06:41:31AM *  1 point [-]

Also, on whether you can distinguish success from failure.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit