|
|
|
|
|
|
by jerf
5633 days ago
|
|
|
The debate has gone on great without me, but the only thing I would point out and verify is that in the context of Elizier's writing, as was pointed out, the "epistemological state" is definitely going to be the assigned probabilities the entity is carrying around internally for Bayesian updates. He may not have spelled that out this time but where the term might be fuzzy in other people's hands I do feel like I know fairly precisely what he means, and where the fuzziness may be isn't relevant to today's debate. (Also, I'm just alluding to the fact that I think I know what it means, this is not itself an explanation, just a labeling.) |
|
|
Okay - then I need to brush up on this Bayesian stuff, care to point me in the right direction? I only have undergrad level maths only so nothing to tricky please !! I really haven't meant to raise anybody's hackles here.