2 ms·
Quite the contrary. The only thing that really matters when it comes to probabilistic forecasting is that we do the maths right. The numbers will always be mad
by kqr 2y ago
Quite the contrary. The only thing that really matters when it comes to probabilistic forecasting is that we do the maths right.
The numbers will always be made up estimations, so the only thing that sort of makes sure we converge on similar solutions is getting the maths right.
A person is free to make any outlandish estimation of any individual probability, but when they are faced with the task of trying to make it mathematically cohere with other estimations is when they realise how outlandish the initial estimation was.
I have tried to write about this before: https://two-wrongs.com/what-is-probability.html https://two-wrongs.com/what-is-probability.html
- esperent 2y agoOk, from reading the first section of your post: > Events need to be well defined Then from the article: > Say you’re working on a Laravel web app. You’re about 90% sure you know how to start the app. You’re 80% sure you know how to handle the infra you’ll need to get it online. And you’re 70% sure you know how to get your first customer. Are these events well defined? 1. Starting the app (about 90%) 2. Handle the infra (80%) 3. Get your first customer (70%) 3. is possibly well defined, or could be made so. The others are not. So not only are the numbers made up, the events are not even well defined in the first place! Why would we go to the effort of ensuring correct maths here?
- kqr 2y agoI'm going to give OP the benefit of the doubt and assume they have sat down and figured out what "starting the app" really means, but they didn't want that definition to be the focus of the article.