It’s important that everyone be Bayesian, of course.
To address the implied subtext: yes, I’m in general more worried about false convictions than false acquittals.
Arguably, if investigators and jurors were pure Bayesian epistemic rationalists, attorneys (on either side) wouldn’t even be necessary. That’s an extremely fanciful state of affairs, however.
Were defense attorneys left out by accident, or do you think it’s not important that they be Bayesian?
It’s important that everyone be Bayesian, of course.
To address the implied subtext: yes, I’m in general more worried about false convictions than false acquittals.
Arguably, if investigators and jurors were pure Bayesian epistemic rationalists, attorneys (on either side) wouldn’t even be necessary. That’s an extremely fanciful state of affairs, however.