In my view, "the problem of induction" is just a bunch of philosophers obsessing over the fact that induction is not deduction, and that you therefore cannot predict the future with logical certainty. This is true, but not very interesting. We should instead spend our energy thinking about how to ma...(read more)
I am not sure I fully understand this comment, or why you believe my argument is circular. It is possible that you are right, but I would very much appreciate a more thorough explanation.
In particular, I am not "concluding" that humans were produced by an evolutionary process; but rather using it ...(read more)
Update: The editors of the Journal of Clinical Epidemiology have now rejected my second letter to the editor, and thus helped prove Eliezer's point about four layers of conversation.
> Why do you think two senior biostats guys would disagree with you if it was obviously wrong? I have worked with enough academics to know that they are far far from infallible, but curious on your analysis of this question.
Good question. I think a lot of this is due to a cultural difference betwe...(read more)
I wrote this on my personal blog; I was reluctant to post this to Less Wrong since it is not obviously relevant to the core interests of LW users. However, I concluded that some of you may find it interesting as an example of how the academic publishing system is broken. It is relevant to Eliezer's ...(read more)
I wrote this on my personal blog; I was reluctant to post this to Less Wrong since it is not obviously relevant to the core interests of LW users. However, I concluded that some of you may find it interesting as an example of how the academic publishing system is broken. It is relevant to Eliezer's...(read more)
VortexLeague: Can you be a little more specific about what kind of help you need?
A very short, general introduction to Less Wrong is available at http://lesswrong.com/about/
Essentially, Less Wrong is a reddit-type forum for discussing how we can make our beliefs more accurate.
Thank you for the link, that is a very good presentation and it is good to see that ML people are thinking about these things.
There certainly are ML algorithms that are designed to make the second kind of predictions, but generally they only work if you have a correct causal model
It is possibl...(read more)
I skimmed this paper and plan to read it in more detail tomorrow. My first thought is that it is fundamentally confused. I believe the confusion comes from the fact that the word "prediction" is used with two separate meanings: Are you interested in predicting Y given an observed value of X (Pr[Y ...(read more)
Thanks for catching that, I stand corrected.