Formalism, which appears in the title, is not mentioned anywhere in the post, as far as I can see.
Apart from that, I have to ask, what is the purpose of this post? What is the point you are making? It looks like a rehash of Sequence elements, put together somewhat at random. It’s almost as though someone had coded a Markov-chain bot to imitate a typical LessWrong discussion, except that such a bot would be unlikely to mis-spell ‘frequentist’.
The author is resolving a mysterious question (“Is probability frequentist or bayesian?”) quite nicely. Maybe it is covered in that painfully long monster “Sequences” but is surely useful to a novice.
Formalism, which appears in the title, is not mentioned anywhere in the post, as far as I can see.
Apart from that, I have to ask, what is the purpose of this post? What is the point you are making? It looks like a rehash of Sequence elements, put together somewhat at random. It’s almost as though someone had coded a Markov-chain bot to imitate a typical LessWrong discussion, except that such a bot would be unlikely to mis-spell ‘frequentist’.
The author is resolving a mysterious question (“Is probability frequentist or bayesian?”) quite nicely. Maybe it is covered in that painfully long monster “Sequences” but is surely useful to a novice.