From: D. Alex (adsl7iie@tpg.com.au)
Date: Thu Aug 04 2005 - 08:09:04 MDT
> ... You seem to believe that in the absence of "specific support" - which
is
> apparently something you get to define, if none of the historically
similar
> situations from dogs to Lord Kelvin count as generalizable cases - you
must
> assign probability zero. This is flatly wrong.
Ah, the inapropriate analogy again.
What chance did the medieval alchemists have of transmuting lead into gold?
Why is the "alchemist" comparison less appropriate than "dogs" for AI Boxing
situation?
> ... ... ... If you read
> http://yudkowsky.net/bayes/technical.html you will see why you should
never
> assign probability zero to anything.
What is the probability that a new three digit prime number will be found?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Feb 21 2006 - 04:23:00 MST