army1987 comments on Don't Get Offended - LessWrong

32 Post author: katydee 07 March 2013 02:11AM

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

Comments (588)

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

Comment author: [deleted] 10 March 2013 04:07:37PM *  1 point [-]

Hmm, so E(the Math SAT score that X deserves|the Math SAT score that X got is 800, and X is male) is just 4 points more than E(the Math SAT score that X deserves|the Math SAT score that X got is 800, and X is female). That doesn't sound like terribly much to me, and I'd guess there are plenty of people who, due to corrupted mindware and stuff, would treat a male who got 800 better than a female who got 800 by a much greater extent than justified by that 4-point difference in the Bayesian posterior expected values. (Cf the person who told whowhowho that Obama must be dumber than Bush -- surely we know much more about them than their races?)

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 10 March 2013 07:44:26PM *  3 points [-]

I'm not sure if this is correct, but I sometimes wonder given how they're surrounded by spin-doctors and other image manipulators how much we really know about prominent politicians, especially when the politician in question is new so you can't look at his record.