This visualization was inspired by the Julia Galef video that I linked to in the opening paragraph. One thing I liked about that video is that it represents probability space as a box which, for understanding Bayes' rule, I think is much more intuitive than the circular venn-diagram approaches. Some...
Sometimes if I'm reading something difficult to understand or written in an uninteresting way I'll skip ahead to the end of the chapter, or perhaps just skim ahead several paragraphs until something looks interesting. Then I'll read one paragraph at a time in reverse order. I think this helps you...
This visualization was inspired by the Julia Galef video that I linked to in the opening paragraph. One thing I liked about that video is that it represents probability space as a box which, for understanding Bayes' rule, I think is much more intuitive than the circular venn-diagram approaches. Some improvements that I think this visualization offers is showing the different probabilities updating in relation to each other, generalizing to more than two events for both priors and likelihoods, and explicitly showing the discarding of conditional probabilities of unobserved events and normalization of the posteriors.
I think usually the best way is to ask them what kind of betting odds they would take. Although in this case the difficulty in verifying might be a problem. But maybe if you argued that a 100% certainty means they should be willing to lay infinite odds that might get them thinking.
I think something similar happened in the case of coding bootcamps. One thing I've noticed is that some of those who invested in the old signaling method were incentivized to reject and convince others to reject the new signal. Coding is one of the skills less reliant on signaling so I imagine this would be a bigger problem in other fields.
Edit: Also riffing off Benquo's post, I think it's also quite common for good programmers who felt they were undervalued in the market to start their own startups. On the other hand, coding bootcamps also seem to have "worked" to some extent. I think in general it depends on the risk/rewards of accepting the new signal. It's easier bear the risk yourself than to convince someone else to, but in the case of the tech industry there was enough incentive to take that chance.
I like this, sort of like reverse-engineering the slight but persistent thoughts and impulses that arise when you're meditating.
I see, that's an interesting point. I think there's also a lot of interesting parallels with investing and risk management, like the idea of leveraging current assets into high reward/high risk plays, or people's varying risk tolerance (need more/less of the comfort zone), or the idea of diminishing returns (going from 0 to 1 friend is a much bigger perceived jump than 100 to 101).
I think it's a tradeoff because a more diverse social circle can offer more diverse benefits, and a larger social circle is more robust (in case some members become unavailable). Being able to maintain a diverse social circle also means you can fare better in society outside that circle.
On the other hand the process will expose you more to rejection and other social liabilities. So the question is if it's worth it or not. If it's too hard or not rewarding enough then it might not be. Maybe we can say that people often miscalculate here because they underestimate how much easier it is to find new people than to change a person's mind about you.
There's lots of examples of this. Easier to move up at a new compan than to get a promotion. Easier to find more potential customers than to sell to someone who is uninterested.
Sometimes if I'm reading something difficult to understand or written in an uninteresting way I'll skip ahead to the end of the chapter, or perhaps just skim ahead several paragraphs until something looks interesting. Then I'll read one paragraph at a time in reverse order. I think this helps you focus by forcing you to guess what the writer's thought process is, and it can also help to know in advance what point they're working towards.
Hey thanks for the feedback! After playing around with it more myself I agree with you about the percentages. I think ideally for more precise values it would have a manual input option, but rounding to whole values for now would be better. I also like the label changing suggestion.