The idea that a static world implies monotonically increasing confidence in your beliefs is really shaky, logically.
The idea that a static world implies monotonically increasing confidence in your beliefs is really shaky, logically. Hill-climbing in a landscape of belief-fitness could easily arrive at a local maximum. Exactly, and it's common to see that in many fields. People are persuaded by things that were bad ideas when they were new, and aren't swayed by new evidence to the contrary. To further improve your beliefs you might need to become less certain. Isn't that sort of the point of the essay? Apart from that, how can something (confidence) increase in a static world? I don't understand. Didn't your previous point argue exactly how hill-climbing could happen, and isn't that a (bad) example of confidence changing? Or are you really arguing over the semantics changing beliefs in a static world? I hope you aren't; otherwise, like you said: A waste of time.
Posted by nl on Dec 21, 2014, 12:56 AM
Tags
Related issues
- Not sure what you suggest to do.
- Why is this not yet published on the official website and why is there no CVE?
- The biggest problem with having an LLM do this, from what I've observed of at least frontier models, is that the way they are trained...
- The biggest problem with MOND is that it was hand-crafted with additional parameters simply to fit the data.
- (My comment is about detached houses).
- The biggest problem with this is that I can't run my company's own internal benchmarks against this API, because they will be trained int...
Raise real-world problems, find people facing the same issue, and discuss solutions.9,000 issues0 comments
hackernews (Other)
Not sure what you suggest to do.
NewWhy is this not yet published on the official website and why is there no CVE?
NewThe biggest problem with having an LLM do this, from what I've observed of at least frontier models, is that the way they are trained...
The biggest problem with MOND is that it was hand-crafted with additional parameters simply to fit the data.
(My comment is about detached houses).
The biggest problem with this is that I can't run my company's own internal benchmarks against this API, because they will be trained int...
> steer Claude away from over-engineering parts of the system in response to hypothetical concerns.
Why is there no comparison with FLUX 3 Image?
The idea that a static world implies monotonically increasing confidence in your beliefs is really shaky, logically.
The idea that a static world implies monotonically increasing confidence in your beliefs is really shaky, logically. Hill-climbing in a landscape of belief-fitness could easily arrive at a local maximum. Exactly, and it's common to see that in many fields. People are persuaded by things that were bad ideas when they were new, and aren't swayed by new evidence to the contrary. To further improve your beliefs you might need to become less certain. Isn't that sort of the point of the essay? Apart from that, how can something (confidence) increase in a static world? I don't understand. Didn't your previous point argue exactly how hill-climbing could happen, and isn't that a (bad) example of confidence changing? Or are you really arguing over the semantics changing beliefs in a static world? I hope you aren't; otherwise, like you said: A waste of time.
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Start the discussion.