= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
And, presumably, you have taken an introductory statistics class? Hm. Probably in high school, and then in college (assuming you've been) you skipped the introductory class and took one with only T-tests etc. and no counting problems? Seems like the most likely way to miss learning Bayes' theorem and still make that statement.
Bayes' Theorem is taught in High-School here, at all levels of math.
In response to
More "Stupid" Questions
What do other people subjectively experience when they are thinking? To me its like talking to myself (in verbal english sentences) but I'm told that isn't universal.
Some mixture of verbal thinking, and what I can only really describe as 'thinking in rules'.
I sometimes forget how much untapped potential in term of networking opportunities Less Wrong holds.
That's hard, because search engines have been dumbed down to the point where you can't google for a literal 'Q*'... A local search turned up http://lesswrong.com/lw/1zv/the_shabbos_goy/ as having one use of 'Q*' and bringing up 'lost purposes'.
Probably made even more difficult because I misremembered the letter. It was G*, and the article was The Importance of Goodhart's Law. It suddenly came back to me in a flash after seeing your reply, so thanks!
In response to
Open Thread, July 1-15, 2013
I need help finding a particular thread on LW, it was a discussion of either utility or ethics, and it utilized the symbols Q and Q* extensively, as well as talking about Lost Purposes. My inability to locate it is causing me brain hurt.
In response to
How I Became More Ambitious
If you're having difficulty with Akrasia and procrastination and you are still looking for solutions, might I suggest the Less Wrong Study Hall? We do constant pomodoros of 25 minutes work, 5 minutes rest, and many of us have found it tremendously effective.
(This is a result of the Co-Working Collaboration to Combat Akrasia post)
Not everything I know about what I know about tacit knowledge is tacit!
This conversation just metacitasized.
It's okay, I'll show myself out.
FYI, there's no need to be careful around hard drives (except for your own safety, since they're large chunks of metal your magnet will stick to.) The platters of a modern hard drive are too high-coercivity and too well-shielded for even a substantial neodymium magnet (bigger than you can fit in a fingertip) to affect them.
Credit cards, on the other hand.
Also, aren't MRI's going to be a problem?
Unfortunately, everything I know about tacit knowledge is tacit.
How do you know that?
View more: Next
= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}
Where is "here"? I didn't encounter Bayes' Rule in an academic setting until I took a finite maths class at university (in Arizona, US).
Edit: Well, actually I was recommended a book called Choice and Chance by Brian Skyrms by a philosophy professor which explicitly teaches it in the context of Bayesian epistemology, but that was the result of out-of-class conversation and was not related to any particular course I was taking. BTW, I whole-heartedly recommend the book as an introduction to inductive logic.
By "here," I meant Israel.