2026-10-13 12:22 UTC
Oh, but for a Bayesian super intelligence it’d be easy!
That’s actually true in a way: Bayes theorem and (actual science-oriented, rather than bullshit handwavey) statistics involving it are about how conditional probabilities interact, including, overly simplified, how to get from prior probabilities (what i find how probable before looking at data) to posterior probabilities (what i find how probable conditioned on data).
Basically what it means to throw “Bayesian” into the word soup (because a stew requires more substance) is that the fairy tale is not about some blank slate figuring out everything from minimal data and first principles, but that it’s about a model that starts accurately and doesn’t have to adjust much (because otherwise by necessity it’d need more data - otherwise it’s not Bayesian).
God I hate this
Replies (2)
-
@DonPiano@feddit.org 2026-10-13 12:23
Maybe I should put in the effort and make a full post some day
-
@DonPiano@feddit.org 2026-10-13 12:58
Basically: if it’s Bayesian, the less data you put in, the closer you remain to what you started with. It’s not magic.