dthunt

7 ms·

1.
by dthunt 12y ago
I've done this for an hour or so on occasion. I don't find it a particular strain. I may be doing something different than what you are doing, though.
2.
by dthunt 12y ago
When I meditate, I usually notice my feet, for example. I notice my feet if I get a little bit jittery, and for me that's sufficient to cut a lot of the whammy out of strong emotion, agitation, moderate amounts of panic, pain. I haven
3.
by dthunt 12y ago
Name the next plausible explanation and how likely you think it is relative to 'save money, screw your data'. I think you'll have takers on a bet at those odds, given what you just said.
4.
by dthunt 12y ago
Retracted then. I hadn't noticed that.
5.
by dthunt 12y ago
Probably not training "matching", given that there is no place where you indicate what the correct thing was. It could be gathering data about how people draw shapes in general, but it's not immediately obvious to me how much
6.
by dthunt 12y ago
Well, he's ALLEGED to have done that. People are becoming increasingly interested in the case because it's looking probable that enforcement/prosecution has done something untoward. Everybody has an interest in law enforcemen
7.
by dthunt 12y ago
It may help to rewrite those in your head to, "as an experienced systems administrator who knows how these particular config files work" or perhaps "how config files work in general". These are all questions of basic fac
8.
by dthunt 12y ago
I am a strong advocate of the following principle: Defeat your enemies. Rackspace deserves some big props, here. More should follow their example.
9.
by dthunt 12y ago
It seems really unlikely to me that they would have set up this system the incredibly dumb way.
10.
by dthunt 12y ago
The end result is that the public doesn't know about the rule, so they see psychologists acting a certain way and frequently think it's actually epistemically bad, or impossible, to reason about the mental states of other humans b
11.
by dthunt 12y ago
APA should ditch the Goldwater rule.
12.
by dthunt 12y ago
If you ask people to estimate the number of protons inside the sun, you might develop a peak around some sorts of numbers, but it's not likely to be a particularly good estimate.
13.
by dthunt 12y ago
I am going to challenge that belief by asking you to do the following: Try solving the blue and red pots problem, given only a single observation. Now try again, this time with two observations.
14.
by dthunt 12y ago
If you can find that, provide a link. I strongly doubt people are particularly good (without applying some sort of rigor) at estimating beans in jars.
15.
by dthunt 12y ago
They're hypothetical inferences, but the downside to using actual realistic examples is that even when they're meticulously researched, people nitpick them to a degree that baffles me. Like, asserting "but the probability of
16.
by dthunt 12y ago
Not only cheated, but also destroyed an opportunity to learn something valuable. GP can, however, take other calibration tests elsewhere. Here is one: http://calibratedprobabilityassessment.org/ Don't cheat this time.
17.
by dthunt 12y ago
Yes. The problems absolutely illustrate the concept if you have a reliable overconfidence confidence bias. You do not need a background in psychology to understand "Hey, I feel 90% confidence, but am being surprised nearly 1 in 3 time
18.
by dthunt 12y ago
Yeah, this is a fair criticism. There are explicit bounds encoded in each problem and when those conflict with your estimates, you will be frustrated. Haven't got a frigging clue isn't a fair thing to say though. The whole point
19.
by dthunt 12y ago
There is no graduation ceremony.
20.
by dthunt 12y ago
It probably would have been a lot smarter to post this somewhere inside the continental US.
21.
by dthunt 12y ago
Police organizations don't seem to be particularly good at learning lessons from these sorts of mishaps. I heard a story a number of years ago in Silver Spring, MD, about how the police were confused by a large marijuana delivery they
22.
by dthunt 12y ago
Oh, part of that explanation assumes you know how to use Bayes' Theorem. If you don't, this doesn't look like a simple explanation, it probably looks like the ravings of a madman because I'm assuming you know a few of t
23.
by dthunt 12y ago
The full text of a draft version is out there, actually. I bought my copy, though. :)
24.
by dthunt 12y ago
Look. I'll explain it really simple. He's saying it has to be > 0, because he is unwilling to rule out ESP as a logical possibility. If he assigned it 0, no matter how good the experimental design was, and no matter what the t
25.
by dthunt 12y ago
It's actually not a problem. You can come up with any number of hypotheses about coins. Some of them take the form, "This coin will produce <some specific output> in the next 1000 typical flips". That hypothesis and oth
26.
by dthunt 12y ago
I very much like the way he lays out the groundwork. It answers fairly directly a lot of criticisms I've seen leveled at probability.
27.
by dthunt 12y ago
Really? Do you actually think that Jaynes is being unreasonable when he assigns ESP a prior that is lower than "has some sort of trick" or some other thing that generally turns out to be the explanatory factor for a magician? He&
28.
by dthunt 12y ago
Remember that you're trading a fixed amount of happiness here for some sort of return (which might be less than the happiness than you sacrifice). What sort of happiness trades are you willing to make at that price? Intelligence that m
29.
by dthunt 12y ago
Doing pretty well at basic reasoning skills has a lot to do with good decisionmaking, in that it's required.
30.
by dthunt 12y ago
However, if you know that, and can put a price on your naive happiness, you can make a choice about whether you'd like to develop skills that will help you in a large number of areas of your life. So, yes. Sacrifice that naive happines

More ›