All of Dave3's Comments + Replies

Asch's Conformity Experiment

What are the odds, given today's society, that a randomly selected group of people will include any honest Bayesians. Safer to assume that most of the group are either lying, self-deluded, confused, or have altered perceptions. Particularly so in a setting like a psychology experiment.

2pnrjulius10yStrict honest Bayesians? ZERO. (Not even LW contains a single true honest Bayesian.) Approximations of honest Bayesians? Better than you might think. Certainly LW is full of reasonably good approximations, and in studies about 80% of people are honest (though most people assume that only 50% of people are honest, a phenomenon known as the Trust Gap). The Bayesian part is harder, since people who are say, religious, or superstitious, or believe in various other obviously false things, clearly don't qualify.
Thou Art Godshatter

"Thou Art Godshatter"! Finally, a name for my Christian/Prog/Electronica combo!

Adaptation-Executers, not Fitness-Maximizers

The atoms of a screwdriver don't have tiny little XML tags inside describing their "objective" purpose.

Not yet, but those atoms probably will be tagged in XML with the designer's intent fairly soon. Also the user manual, credits, bill of materials and sourcing, recycling instructions, links to users groups and issue repositories, etc., etc. It obviously doesn't change your argument, but I do wonder how our cognitive biases will be affected when everything is tagged with intent and history, crosslinked and searchable. I guess we'll find out soon enough.