Sadly handwavey attempt to refute Bayesianism, written in Kegan-3 languagehttp://nostalgebraist.tumblr.com/post/161645122124/bayes-a-kinda-sorta-masterpost …
-
-
Replying to @Plinz
That's a really uncharitable take on what Rob tried to do there
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @blubberquark
I think that an attempt to criticize Bayesian rationalism requires more rigor, because the stakes are very high.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Plinz @blubberquark
The "...they teach you" formulations are indicative of the toolbox approach, of course. If he would explain how "they" justify their teaching and he'd prove (instead of insinuate) why "they" are wrong he might become rationalist.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Plinz @blubberquark
I was reading to the end and asked myself when they would present the better alternative to Bayesian inference. And then: least-squares methods with various regulations? Really?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
No, his preferred alternative is to just wing it. You have this grab bag of tools, and you can make new ones, but there can supposedly be no systematic way to pick them. Which is why @meaningness cites him in support of his “metarational nebulosity”.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.