Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I think you may not be appreciating the subtlety of the repetition of the "probability of rolling a six". His claim is that aleatory probability starts with the assumption that you have a standard six-sided die with all sides weighted equally, but that epistemic uncertainty requires accounting for the uncertainty that you have a fair die, or even that it has six sides. So in both cases you are indeed trying to calculate the "probability of rolling a six", but the answers, and the process for creating them, are not the same. So while it might not have been the best phrasing for clarity, he's making a meaningful distinction.


Yes, agreed. I noticed that potential interpretation, mostly because I already knew the distinction. Now suppose you didn’t already know.


I didn't know and I had to read that part twice.


Yes, the description is technically correct (the best kind of correct...), but as an explanation it is garbage because it hides the point to be explained behind subtlety.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: