= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
pianoforte611 comments on The Unfriendly Superintelligence next door - LessWrong
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 (67)
I'm sorry, I'm really not interested in getting into an ideological debate or whether frequentist or bayesian statistics is "better" - if you think that frequentist methods are worthless, then the inferential gap is too wide to begin to bridge.
Agreed - I do believe that Frequentist methods are primitive compared to modern machine learning.
Also, I don't even have a strong opinion on whether a few years of vit D supplementation in the elderly is going to make a big difference in many health outcomes like cancer risk - the correct comparison is between a lifetime of adequate vit D levels vs a lifetime of inadequacy. I don't suspect that correcting it late in life is going to avoid most of the cancer risk.