anindefinitearticle

A Bayesian prior is your unique perspective that can become modified into a posterior by evidence.

It is the consideration that evidence does not uniquely determine our understanding of reality, that evidence can be interpreted by different people in different ways.

Discussing priors is an acknowledgement of the fundamentally subjective nature of truth and scientific testing.

We're targeting guys who didn't find the last 12 years of anti-Trump messaging from Democrats particularly persuasive.

This time we'll persuade them for sure with...

checks notes...

anti-Trump messaging from Democrats!

I'm with you. I've also never heard of Charli XCX.

This type of policy stifles freedom of thought.

There is no such thing as people who "already have correct takes" who can be treated with the authority your words imply.

Yes we should all listen more. But we also need to speak so that others may listen and so all can benefit from a diversity of ideas.

"I wonder if he'll notice that it's not going to do anything without this tape..."

A lens cap visibly disables a lens, while allowing it to be taken off quickly and cleanly in an emergency (e.g. a cop enters).

That's why instead of stickers, we should have lens caps with an easy toggle mechanism.

Nationalism is authoritarianism.

Libertarian nationalist is an oxymoron.

It's a twitter account, so you instantly know it's just there to spew bullshit and disinformation. Anyone still on twitter is suspect.

Frequentism relies on the dubious assumption that an objective reality is both possible, and that this privileged reference frame is the one from which the data being analyzed were taken.

Einstein's general relativity is fundamentally incompatible with the concept of a privileged reference frame from which an observer can operate objectively. Einstein credits his socialism with providing him this insight, and frankly all of relativity breaks down without it.

Bayesianism acknowledges that bias is fundamentally intertwined with all evidence, and that evidence only makes sense within the context of the question being asked. Bayesianism is the recognition that all new data must be interpreted within the context of the biases that led to it being taken.

That's what astrology IS. Early, pre-civilization humans observed and studied natural phenomena and astronomical bodies to determine time, to navigate, and to develop a calendar (the zodiac). This is what we developed/organized and passed down as a civilization for these purposes.

It got wrapped up in a questionable psychological model so people would remember it. Even if the reason why people remember the zodiac is not tied to material reality, it still holds incidental value because remembering the zodiac can help you if you get lost because it is based on millennia of careful study of material observations of natural phenomena and astronomical bodies.

Here's an idea: make the publicly accessible data reliable instead of getting rid of it for being wrong.

The most useful thing about being familiar with the zodiac is that if you don't live in a city and can see the sky at night, it functions as calendar, clock, and compass.