Congratulations. Now I'm going to read it.
to deceive you into believing that it is a 𝘝-maximizer.
If it is smart enough to know that it should tell you it's a V-maximizer, then it's smart enough to know that you wanted a V-maximizer.
I would expect people to react mainly to the part about the IMO gold medalist, even though the base rate for being an IMO gold medalist is higher than the base rate for authoring the most-reviewed Harry Potter fanfiction.
This is true, but the reaction is for the conjunction of IMO Gold Medalist and moset-reviewed HP fanfic.
I want to upvote this again.
Well.. I don't think the process is too rigid. You can always discuss it in advance. Also, there are a few things that you do know are better for you, but are still not able to achieve. But yes, there is a risk. I do not think the risk is so great as to not even give this a try though.
Besides, we don't even know if this works yet!
It is. Judgment comes before.
I'm only suggesting this as a trick, once you've already figured out what it is that you need to do. I suppose I could offer my own feedback, but I was hoping that I would at least try and see if it worked over a larger sample space.
Thanks for the input!
I'm not able to correct the hyperlink part, but I did change the name to Phil Goetz as was due.
It's definitely a check, but not a very good check. There are too many in between facts in this case. It really depends on whether Q is solely dependent on Q' or whether it depends on a number of other things (Q'',Q'''......), provided of course that Q'' and Q''' are not in themselves dependent on A, B and C.
A little obvious (to me perhaps, without adjusting for mind projection), but beautifully written.
He didn't "fail". You'll are just talking about different things.