Peter_de_Blanc30 August 2010 05:25:07PM0 points [-]

Trouble is, we already have data. Lots of it. So is there some algebraic trick which lets us add that new layer to the hypothesis without going back to evidential square one?

Bayesian updating is timeless. It doesn't care whether you observed the data before or after you wrote the hypothesis.

Peter_de_Blanc29 August 2010 05:00:53AM* 1 point [-]

Selecting a random English sentence will introduce a bias towards concepts that are easy to express in English.

Peter_de_Blanc21 August 2010 07:50:21PM0 points [-]

There is no way to kill those groups if white is trying to save them and does not make any mistakes. This is the usual meaning of "alive" in Go.

Peter_de_Blanc21 August 2010 07:29:24PM* 0 points [-]

I don't understand this comment.

[EDIT: Also, I agree with the GP: figure 1 is dead, figures 2 and 3 are alive.]

Peter_de_Blanc01 August 2010 07:22:51PM4 points [-]

That sounds (to me) better than having children, but not as good as living longer.

In response to comment by Morendil on Play for a Cause
Peter_de_Blanc14 July 2010 03:36:34AM1 point [-]

Thanks for the game. In accordance with our bet, I'll be donating $20 to KIPP.

Peter_de_Blanc13 July 2010 05:02:34AM3 points [-]

There has not yet been a truly benevolent dictator and it would be delusional at best to believe that you will be the first.

This is true approximately to the extent that there has never been a truly benevolent person. Power anti-corrupts.

Peter_de_Blanc02 July 2010 01:17:12PM11 points [-]

Lightning was the weapon of Zeus. Now it can be controlled by electrical engineers.

The Aztecs thought the sun was a god. Now plasma physicists can produce light via similar means.

Peter_de_Blanc02 July 2010 08:20:12AM3 points [-]

I posted without having thought of any examples, still confident that the statement is true.

Peter_de_Blanc02 July 2010 08:13:16AM3 points [-]

It does, and it is.

View more: Next