@GabrielDuquette The best I have heard is "You can't use Bayes if you can't cover the entire probability space", but that's a strawman.
-
-
@St_Rev@ContentOfMedia@GabrielDuquette Plus it's not just an issue of covering, but spreading a finite measure over lots of space. -
@othercriteria@ContentOfMedia@GabrielDuquette Yeah, lots of weird moral paradoxes seem like they arise from bad measure theory. -
@St_Rev@ContentOfMedia@GabrielDuquette I don't know if you're being serious or not, and I'd like to keep it that way! -
@othercriteria Dead serious. eg antinatalism tries to reason about harms done/not done to nonexistent entities. erm -
@othercriteria Sorry to spoiler it -
@St_Rev No worries. Got 90% of the enjoyable confusion that I think was there to be gotten.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@St_Rev@GabrielDuquette I was going to say no one is suggesting that you should actually use Bayes, but maybe I'm steelmaning. -
@St_Rev@GabrielDuquette That is, Bayes is a "theoretical best" process which you can measure yourself against and try to approximate. -
@St_Rev@GabrielDuquette Am I being too charitable here? -
@ContentOfMedia There's a whole lotta motte-and-bailey going on. And then there's this http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=2410
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@St_Rev@ContentOfMedia@GabrielDuquette Yeah, I find myself putting a lot of work into defining spaces of outcomes. Which is cool, but hardThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.
. Banned in Sweden. SubGenius, Zhuangist, white-hat troll. Defrocked mathematician. Brain problems.