top | item 46482109 (no title) throwaway1389z | 1 month ago The intervention in those countries wasn't explicitly for oil. And do you wonder why do you have to go so far back? discuss order hn newest gretch|1 month ago > And do you wonder why do you have to go so far back?I'm wondering why you don't think they count. ImPostingOnHN|1 month ago Newer information should cause you to update your Bayesian priors formed with older information. throwaway1389z|1 month ago Relevance is relative.In the presence of more similar experiments, only with pure dogma or dishonesty that one can opt to infer the outcome based on far less similar and even less contemporaneous experiments.
gretch|1 month ago > And do you wonder why do you have to go so far back?I'm wondering why you don't think they count. ImPostingOnHN|1 month ago Newer information should cause you to update your Bayesian priors formed with older information. throwaway1389z|1 month ago Relevance is relative.In the presence of more similar experiments, only with pure dogma or dishonesty that one can opt to infer the outcome based on far less similar and even less contemporaneous experiments.
ImPostingOnHN|1 month ago Newer information should cause you to update your Bayesian priors formed with older information.
throwaway1389z|1 month ago Relevance is relative.In the presence of more similar experiments, only with pure dogma or dishonesty that one can opt to infer the outcome based on far less similar and even less contemporaneous experiments.
gretch|1 month ago
I'm wondering why you don't think they count.
ImPostingOnHN|1 month ago
throwaway1389z|1 month ago
In the presence of more similar experiments, only with pure dogma or dishonesty that one can opt to infer the outcome based on far less similar and even less contemporaneous experiments.