I’m excited about this but a little skeptical. Bayes theorem is a single equation between four quantities. Every time you discuss a new bit of evidence, you have two or three degrees of freedom to argue about. Maybe K consistently judges P(E|guilty)/P(E) to be smaller than R does—then what?
If 10 bits difference of opinion is the result of 10 seemingly individual bits being added up, then one or probably both are making bottom line arguments.
But I don’t expect we’ll find that. I expect one large point of disagreement or maybe a lot of highly analogous disagreements, like whether A-Z are independent or correlated; or whether X screens off A-Z.
I’m excited about this but a little skeptical. Bayes theorem is a single equation between four quantities. Every time you discuss a new bit of evidence, you have two or three degrees of freedom to argue about. Maybe K consistently judges P(E|guilty)/P(E) to be smaller than R does—then what?
If 10 bits difference of opinion is the result of 10 seemingly individual bits being added up, then one or probably both are making bottom line arguments.
But I don’t expect we’ll find that. I expect one large point of disagreement or maybe a lot of highly analogous disagreements, like whether A-Z are independent or correlated; or whether X screens off A-Z.