Teaching Bayesian Reasoning in Less Than Two Hours

I don't. QED

fair enough. maybe it will interest to someone else
("QED" stands for what btw? quality education data?)

Rough translation from its Latin abbrivation is 'that which was to be proven'. My spelling in English is bad enough Im not even going to attempt the laten spelling.

Its a formal (and some professors think arrogant) way of ending a proof.

It also doubles as 'quantum electrodynamics' which is a branch of physics pioneered by Richard Feynman.

thank you google:
"quod erad demonstrandum" = 'which was to be proved'

for those who want to know more about probability theory here'sanother link that you will probably find interesting.

nothing in that paper makes the slightest attempt to explain how someone should/will behave differently if they believe the chance of them having disease x =

i. 0.051%
ii. 0.132%

the u&k aspect of this debate actually arrives there: not the ability to calculate finetuned probabilities very very exactly, but to interpret probability at all (ie to turn a number into an action) — which would of course include a serious scepticism towards the entire culture of finetuned probability => the margins of error of bad information gathering (either incompetent or dishonest) just dwarf the margins of error of poor rough calculation (probably one of the main social reasons for widespread unwillingness to waste a lot of time learning these fiddly techniques is a hunch that they are primarily being used by clever ppl to lie to you, and that a little knowledge on yr part wd probably be a dangerous thing)

There's a particularly dumb little bit of shimmying re the O.J.Simpson case in that article: if the jury have all been specially trained to see through such-and-such a trick, then a brilliant trial lawyer will use a trick they are not going to see through... empanelling only qualified statisticians on juries would not change the ratio of good/bad acquittals in the slightest, after the first season when the lawyers were still adapting their strategies

that paper = the first paper

The argt. of the first paper seems to be less about non-baysian reasoning than the poor ways in which statistics are presented.

(haha sinker maybe it doesn't matter for diagnoses but whatabout for building a bridge?)

clover if i wanted a bridge built i wd pay ppl to do the calculations 4 me

(they are good at this = all their bridges so far did not fall down)

what does "u&k" mean?

99.9% probability 19 out of 20 times it means "urgent and key".

the rest of the time it means "Uxbridge and Kidderminster"