Maybe it should have 1 in a billion priors, but that isn’t very relevant. The question isn’t actually decided by precisely how many bits of evidence you’d need to conclude it, it’s trivial to come by strong evidence supporting the idea.
Yes, but it’s also very easy to convince yourself you have more evidence than you do, e.g. invent a theory that is actually crazy but seems insightful to you (may or may not apply to this case).
I think intelligence is particularly hard to assess in this way because of recursivity.
Maybe it should have 1 in a billion priors, but that isn’t very relevant. The question isn’t actually decided by precisely how many bits of evidence you’d need to conclude it, it’s trivial to come by strong evidence supporting the idea.
Yes, but it’s also very easy to convince yourself you have more evidence than you do, e.g. invent a theory that is actually crazy but seems insightful to you (may or may not apply to this case).
I think intelligence is particularly hard to assess in this way because of recursivity.