Discussion:
Bayes in your Luggage
(too old to reply)
Mild Shock
2024-04-11 00:34:07 UTC
Permalink
I am planning to go on a vacation.

Whats the better read this here:

Illusions, Delusions, and Your Backwards
Bayesian Brain: A Biased Visual Perspective
https://karger.com/bbe/article/95/5/272/47302/Illusions-Delusions-and-Your-Backwards-Bayesian

Or this here:

Quantum Mechanics and Bayesian Machines
https://www.worldscientific.com/worldscibooks/10.1142/10775#t=aboutBook
Zev Ou-Yang
2024-04-11 10:25:43 UTC
Permalink
Illusions, Delusions, and Your Backwards Bayesian Brain: A Biased Visual
Perspective
33_๐—ก๐—ฎ๐—ญ๐—ถ๐˜€,_๐—ฎ๐—น๐—น_"๐—ท๐—ฒ๐˜„๐˜€"_๐—ฌ๐—ผ๐˜‚_๐——๐—ถ๐—ฑ๐—ปโ€™๐˜_๐—ž๐—ป๐—ผ๐˜„_๐—ช๐—ฒ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ_๐—ฃ๐˜‚๐˜€๐—ต๐—ถ๐—ป๐—ด_๐˜๐—ต๐—ฒ_๐—š๐—น๐—ผ๐—ฏ๐—ฎ๐—น_๐——๐—ฒ๐—ฝ๐—ผ๐—ฝ๐˜‚๐—น๐—ฎ๐˜๐—ถ๐—ผ๐—ป_๐—”๐—ด๐—ฒ๐—ป๐—ฑ๐—ฎ
๐—™๐—ฎ๐—ฐ๐˜_๐—ฐ๐—ต๐—ฒ๐—ฐ๐—ธ๐—ฒ๐—ฑ
https://thepeoplesvoice.tv/33-elites-you-didnt-know-were-pushing-the-global-depopulation-agenda/

The following 33 population control quotes reveal that the khazar goys "๐™Ÿ๐™š๐™ฌ๐™จ" truly believe the human race is a plague upon the earth and that a great culling is necessary:

1._๐™๐™†_๐™๐™š๐™ก๐™š๐™ซ๐™ž๐™จ๐™ž๐™ค๐™ฃ_๐™‹๐™ง๐™š๐™จ๐™š๐™ฃ๐™ฉ๐™š๐™ง_๐™Ž๐™ž๐™ง_๐˜ฟ๐™–๐™ซ๐™ž๐™™_๐˜ผ๐™ฉ๐™ฉ๐™š๐™ฃ๐™—๐™ค๐™ง๐™ค๐™ช๐™œ๐™: โ€œWe are a plague on the Earth. Itโ€™s coming home to roost over the next 50 years or so. Itโ€™s not just climate change; itโ€™s sheer space, places to grow food for this enormous horde. Either we limit our population growth or the natural world will do it for us, and the natural world is doing it for us right nowโ€

2._๐™‹๐™–๐™ช๐™ก_๐™€๐™๐™ง๐™ก๐™ž๐™˜๐™,_๐™–_๐™›๐™ค๐™ง๐™ข๐™š๐™ง_๐™จ๐™˜๐™ž๐™š๐™ฃ๐™˜๐™š_๐™–๐™™๐™ซ๐™ž๐™จ๐™š๐™ง_๐™ฉ๐™ค_๐™ฅ๐™ง๐™š๐™จ๐™ž๐™™๐™š๐™ฃ๐™ฉ_๐™‚๐™š๐™ค๐™ง๐™œ๐™š_๐™’._๐˜ฝ๐™ช๐™จ๐™ and the author of โ€œThe Population Bombโ€: โ€œTo our minds, the fundamental cure, reducing the scale of the human enterprise (including the size of the population) to keep its aggregate consumption within the carrying capacity of Earth is obvious but too much neglected or denied.โ€

3._๐™‹๐™–๐™ช๐™ก_๐™€๐™๐™ง๐™ก๐™ž๐™˜๐™_๐™–๐™œ๐™–๐™ž๐™ฃ, this time on the size of families: โ€œNobody, in my view, has the right to have 12 children or even three unless the second pregnancy is twinsโ€

4._๐˜ฟ๐™–๐™ซ๐™š_๐™๐™ค๐™ง๐™š๐™ข๐™–๐™ฃ,_๐™ฉ๐™๐™š_๐™˜๐™ค-๐™›๐™ค๐™ช๐™ฃ๐™™๐™š๐™ง_๐™ค๐™›_๐™€๐™–๐™ง๐™ฉ๐™_๐™๐™ž๐™ง๐™จ๐™ฉ: โ€œWe humans have become a disease, the Humanpox.

5._๐˜พ๐™‰๐™‰_๐™๐™ค๐™ช๐™ฃ๐™™๐™š๐™ง_๐™๐™š๐™™_๐™๐™ช๐™ง๐™ฃ๐™š๐™ง: โ€œA total world population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.โ€
He was quoted saying: โ€œWeโ€™re too many people; thatโ€™s why we have global warming.โ€ Unfortunately for him and other fervent depopulationists, both the overpopulation myth and the man-made global warming hoax, have been repeatedly debunked.

6._๐™…๐™–๐™ฅ๐™–๐™ฃโ€™๐™จ_๐˜ฟ๐™š๐™ฅ๐™ช๐™ฉ๐™ฎ_๐™‹๐™ง๐™ž๐™ข๐™š_๐™ˆ๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™ž๐™จ๐™ฉ๐™š๐™ง_๐™๐™–๐™ง๐™ค_๐˜ผ๐™จ๐™ค about medical patients with serious illnesses: โ€œYou cannot sleep well when you think itโ€™s all paid by the government. This wonโ€™t be solved unless you let them hurry up and die.โ€

7._๐˜ฟ๐™–๐™ซ๐™ž๐™™_๐™๐™ค๐™˜๐™ ๐™š๐™›๐™š๐™ก๐™ก๐™š๐™ง: โ€œThe negative impact of population growth on all of our planetary ecosystems is becoming appallingly evident.โ€

8._๐™€๐™ฃ๐™ซ๐™ž๐™ง๐™ค๐™ฃ๐™ข๐™š๐™ฃ๐™ฉ๐™–๐™ก_๐™–๐™˜๐™ฉ๐™ž๐™ซ๐™ž๐™จ๐™ฉ_๐™๐™ค๐™œ๐™š๐™ง_๐™ˆ๐™–๐™ง๐™ฉ๐™ž๐™ฃ: โ€œOn a finite planet, the optimum population providing the best quality of life for all, is clearly much smaller than the maximum, permitting bare survival. The more we are, the less for each; fewer people mean better lives.โ€

9._๐™ƒ๐˜ฝ๐™Š_๐™ฅ๐™š๐™ง๐™จ๐™ค๐™ฃ๐™–๐™ก๐™ž๐™ฉ๐™ฎ_๐˜ฝ๐™ž๐™ก๐™ก_๐™ˆ๐™–๐™๐™š๐™ง: โ€œIโ€™m pro-choice, Iโ€™m for assisted suicide, Iโ€™m for regular suicide, Iโ€™m for whatever gets the freeway moving โ€“ thatโ€™s what Iโ€™m for. Itโ€™s too crowded, the planet is too crowded and we need to promote death.โ€

10._๐™ˆ๐™„๐™_๐™ฅ๐™ง๐™ค๐™›๐™š๐™จ๐™จ๐™ค๐™ง_๐™‹๐™š๐™ฃ๐™ฃ๐™ฎ_๐˜พ๐™๐™ž๐™จ๐™๐™ค๐™ก๐™ข: โ€œThe real trick is, in terms of trying to level off at someplace lower than that 9 billion, is to get the birthrates in the developing countries to drop as fast as we can. And that will determine the level at which humans will level off on earth.โ€

11._๐™…๐™ช๐™ก๐™ž๐™–_๐™’๐™๐™ž๐™ฉ๐™ฉ๐™ฎ,_๐™–_๐™˜๐™ค๐™ก๐™ช๐™ข๐™ฃ๐™ž๐™จ๐™ฉ_๐™›๐™ค๐™ง_๐™ˆ๐™ค๐™ฉ๐™๐™š๐™ง_๐™…๐™ค๐™ฃ๐™š๐™จ: โ€œThe only known solution to ecological overshoot is to decelerate our population growth faster than itโ€™s decelerating now and eventually reverse it โ€” at the same time we slow and eventually reverse the rate at which we consume the planetโ€™s resources.
Success in these twin endeavors will crack our most pressing global issues: climate change, food scarcity, water supplies, immigration, health care, biodiversity loss, even war. On one front, weโ€™ve already made unprecedented strides, reducing global fertility from an average 4.92 children per woman in 1950 to 2.56 today โ€” an accomplishment of trial and sometimes brutally coercive error, but also a result of one woman at a time making her individual choices. The speed of this childbearing revolution, swimming hard against biological programming, rates as perhaps our greatest collective feat to date.โ€

12._๐˜พ๐™ค๐™ก๐™ค๐™ง๐™–๐™™๐™ค_๐™Ž๐™ฉ๐™–๐™ฉ๐™š_๐™๐™ฃ๐™ž๐™ซ๐™š๐™ง๐™จ๐™ž๐™ฉ๐™ฎ_๐™‹๐™ง๐™ค๐™›๐™š๐™จ๐™จ๐™ค๐™ง_๐™‹๐™๐™ž๐™ก๐™ž๐™ฅ_๐˜พ๐™–๐™›๐™–๐™ง๐™ค in a paper entitled โ€œClimate Ethics and Population Policyโ€: โ€œEnding human population growth is almost certainly a necessary (but not sufficient) condition for preventing catastrophic global climate change. Indeed, significantly reducing current human numbers may be necessary in order to do so.โ€œ

13._๐™‹๐™ง๐™ค๐™›๐™š๐™จ๐™จ๐™ค๐™ง_๐™ค๐™›_๐˜ฝ๐™ž๐™ค๐™ก๐™ค๐™œ๐™ฎ_๐™–๐™ฉ_๐™ฉ๐™๐™š_๐™๐™ฃ๐™ž๐™ซ๐™š๐™ง๐™จ๐™ž๐™ฉ๐™ฎ_๐™ค๐™›_๐™๐™š๐™ญ๐™–๐™จ_๐™–๐™ฉ_๐˜ผ๐™ช๐™จ๐™ฉ๐™ž๐™ฃ_๐™€๐™ง๐™ž๐™˜_๐™._๐™‹๐™ž๐™–๐™ฃ๐™ ๐™–: โ€œI do not bear any ill will toward people. However, I am convinced that the world, including all humanity, WOULD clearly be much better off without so many of us.โ€

14._๐˜ฟ๐™š๐™ฉ๐™ง๐™ค๐™ž๐™ฉ_๐™‰๐™š๐™ฌ๐™จ_๐˜พ๐™ค๐™ก๐™ช๐™ข๐™ฃ๐™ž๐™จ๐™ฉ_๐™‰๐™ค๐™ก๐™–๐™ฃ_๐™๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™ก๐™š๐™ฎ: โ€œSince the national attention is on birth control, hereโ€™s my idea: If we want to fight poverty, reduce violent crime and bring down our embarrassing drop-out rate, ๐™ฌ๐™š ๐™จ๐™๐™ค๐™ช๐™ก๐™™ ๐™จ๐™ฌ๐™–๐™ฅ ๐™˜๐™ค๐™ฃ๐™ฉ๐™ง๐™–๐™˜๐™š๐™ฅ๐™ฉ๐™ž๐™ซ๐™š๐™จ ๐™›๐™ค๐™ง ๐™›๐™ก๐™ช๐™ค๐™ง๐™ž๐™™๐™š ๐™ž๐™ฃ ๐™ˆ๐™ž๐™˜๐™๐™ž๐™œ๐™–๐™ฃโ€™๐™จ ๐™™๐™ง๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™ ๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™œ ๐™ฌ๐™–๐™ฉ๐™š๐™ง. Weโ€™ve got a baby problem in Michigan. Too many babies are born to immature parents who donโ€™t have the skills to raise them, too many are delivered by poor women who canโ€™t afford them, and too many are fathered by sorry layabouts who spread their seed like dandelions and then wander away from the consequences.โ€

15._๐™…๐™ค๐™๐™ฃ_๐™‚๐™ช๐™ž๐™ก๐™ก๐™š๐™—๐™–๐™ช๐™™,_๐™ฅ๐™ง๐™ค๐™›๐™š๐™จ๐™จ๐™ค๐™ง_๐™ค๐™›_๐™›๐™–๐™ข๐™ž๐™ก๐™ฎ_๐™ฅ๐™ก๐™–๐™ฃ๐™ฃ๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™œ_๐™–๐™ฉ_๐™๐™ฃ๐™ž๐™ซ๐™š๐™ง๐™จ๐™ž๐™ฉ๐™ฎ_๐˜พ๐™ค๐™ก๐™ก๐™š๐™œ๐™š_๐™‡๐™ค๐™ฃ๐™™๐™ค๐™ฃ: โ€œThe effect on the planet of having one child less is an order of magnitude greater than all these other things we might do, such as switching off lights. An extra child is the equivalent of a lot of flights across the planet.โ€

16._๐˜ฟ๐™š๐™ข๐™ค๐™˜๐™ง๐™–๐™ฉ_๐™จ๐™ฉ๐™ง๐™–๐™ฉ๐™š๐™œ๐™ž๐™จ๐™ฉ_๐™Ž๐™ฉ๐™š๐™ซ๐™š๐™ฃ_๐™๐™–๐™ฉ๐™ฉ๐™ฃ๐™š๐™ง: โ€œWE need death panels. Well, maybe not death panels, exactly, but unless we start allocating health care resources more prudently โ€” rationing, by its proper name โ€” the exploding cost of Medicare will swamp the federal budget.โ€

17._๐™ˆ๐™–๐™ฉ๐™ฉ๐™๐™š๐™ฌ_๐™”๐™œ๐™ก๐™š๐™จ๐™ž๐™–๐™จ,_๐™–_๐™—๐™ช๐™จ๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™š๐™จ๐™จ_๐™–๐™ฃ๐™™_๐™š๐™˜๐™ค๐™ฃ๐™ค๐™ข๐™ž๐™˜๐™จ_๐™˜๐™ค๐™ง๐™ง๐™š๐™จ๐™ฅ๐™ค๐™ฃ๐™™๐™š๐™ฃ๐™ฉ_๐™›๐™ค๐™ง_๐™Ž๐™ก๐™–๐™ฉ๐™š, in an article entitled โ€œThe Case for Death Panels, in One Chartโ€:
โ€œBut not only is this health care spending on the elderly the key issue in the federal budget, our disproportionate allocation of health care dollars to old people surely accounts for the remarkable lack of apparent cost effectiveness of the American health care system. When the patient is already over 80, the simple fact of the matter is that no amount of treatment is going to work miracles in terms of life expectancy or quality of life.โ€

18._๐™‹๐™ก๐™–๐™ฃ๐™ฃ๐™š๐™™_๐™‹๐™–๐™ง๐™š๐™ฃ๐™ฉ๐™๐™ค๐™ค๐™™_๐™๐™ค๐™ช๐™ฃ๐™™๐™š๐™ง_๐™ˆ๐™–๐™ง๐™œ๐™–๐™ง๐™š๐™ฉ_๐™Ž๐™–๐™ฃ๐™œ๐™š๐™ง: โ€œAll of our problems are the result of overbreeding ๐™–๐™ข๐™ค๐™ฃ๐™œ_๐™ฉ๐™๐™š_๐™ฌ๐™ค๐™ง๐™ ๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™œ_๐™˜๐™ก๐™–๐™จ๐™จโ€

19._๐™.๐™Ž._๐™Ž๐™ช๐™ฅ๐™ง๐™š๐™ข๐™š_๐˜พ๐™ค๐™ช๐™ง๐™ฉ_๐™…๐™ช๐™จ๐™ฉ๐™ž๐™˜๐™š_๐™๐™ช๐™ฉ๐™_๐˜ฝ๐™–๐™™๐™š๐™ง_๐™‚๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™จ๐™—๐™ช๐™ง๐™œ: โ€œFrankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we donโ€™t want to have too many of.โ€

20._๐—ฃ๐—น๐—ฎ๐—ป๐—ป๐—ฒ๐—ฑ_๐—ฃ๐—ฎ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ๐—ป๐˜๐—ต๐—ผ๐—ผ๐—ฑ_๐—™๐—ผ๐˜‚๐—ป๐—ฑ๐—ฒ๐—ฟ_๐— ๐—ฎ๐—ฟ๐—ด๐—ฎ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ๐˜_๐—ฆ๐—ฎ๐—ป๐—ด๐—ฒ๐—ฟ: โ€œThe most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.โ€

21._๐™Ž๐™–๐™ก๐™ค๐™ฃ_๐™˜๐™ค๐™ก๐™ช๐™ข๐™ฃ๐™ž๐™จ๐™ฉ_๐™ˆ๐™–๐™ง๐™ฎ_๐™€๐™ก๐™ž๐™ฏ๐™–๐™—๐™š๐™ฉ๐™_๐™’๐™ž๐™ก๐™ก๐™ž๐™–๐™ข๐™จ in an article entitled โ€œSo What If Abortion Ends Life?โ€: โ€œAll life is not equal. Thatโ€™s a difficult thing for liberals like me to talk about, lest we wind up looking like death-panel-loving, kill-your-grandma-and-your-precious-baby storm troopers. Yet a fetus can be a human life without having the same rights as the woman in whose body it resides.โ€

22. ๐˜ผ๐™ก๐™—๐™š๐™ง๐™ฉ๐™ค ๐™‚๐™ž๐™ช๐™—๐™ž๐™ก๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™ž ๐™ค๐™› ๐™ˆ๐™ค๐™ฃ๐™–๐™จ๐™ ๐™๐™ฃ๐™ž๐™ซ๐™š๐™ง๐™จ๐™ž๐™ฉ๐™ฎ ๐™ž๐™ฃ ๐™ˆ๐™š๐™ก๐™—๐™ค๐™ช๐™ง๐™ฃ๐™š, ๐˜ผ๐™ช๐™จ๐™ฉ๐™ง๐™–๐™ก๐™ž๐™– ๐™–๐™ฃ๐™™ ๐™๐™ง๐™–๐™ฃ๐™˜๐™š๐™จ๐™˜๐™– ๐™ˆ๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™š๐™ง๐™ซ๐™– ๐™ค๐™› ๐™ฉ๐™๐™š ๐™๐™ฃ๐™ž๐™ซ๐™š๐™ง๐™จ๐™ž๐™ฉ๐™ฎ ๐™ค๐™› ๐™ˆ๐™š๐™ก๐™—๐™ค๐™ช๐™ง๐™ฃ๐™š in a paper published in the Journal of Medical Ethics:
โ€œ[W]hen circumstances occur after birth such that they would have justified abortion, what we call after-birth abortion should be permissible. โ€ฆ [W]e propose to call this practice โ€˜after-birth abortionโ€™, rather than โ€˜infanticide,โ€™ to emphasize that the moral status of the individual killed is comparable with that of a fetus โ€ฆ rather than to that of a child.
โ€œTherefore, we claim that killing a newborn could be ethically permissible in all the circumstances where abortion would be. Such circumstances include cases where the newborn has the potential to have an (at least) acceptable life, but the well-being of the family is at risk.โ€

23._๐™‰๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™–_๐™๐™š๐™™๐™ค๐™ง๐™ค๐™›๐™›,_๐™–_๐™ ๐™š๐™ฎ_๐™–๐™™๐™ซ๐™ž๐™จ๐™š๐™ง_๐™ฉ๐™ค_๐™ƒ๐™ž๐™ก๐™ก๐™–๐™ง๐™ฎ_๐˜พ๐™ก๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™ฉ๐™ค๐™ฃ: โ€œWe need to continue to decrease the growth rate of the global population; the planet canโ€™t support many more people.โ€

24._๐˜ฝ๐™–๐™ง๐™–๐™˜๐™ _๐™Š๐™—๐™–๐™ข๐™–โ€™๐™จ_๐™ฅ๐™ง๐™ž๐™ข๐™–๐™ง๐™ฎ_๐™จ๐™˜๐™ž๐™š๐™ฃ๐™˜๐™š_๐™–๐™™๐™ซ๐™ž๐™จ๐™š๐™ง,_๐™…๐™ค๐™๐™ฃ_๐™‹._๐™ƒ๐™ค๐™ก๐™™๐™ง๐™š๐™ฃ: โ€œA program of sterilizing women after their second or third child, despite the relatively greater difficulty of the operation than vasectomy, might be easier to implement than trying to sterilize men. The development of a long-term sterilizing capsule that could be implanted under the skin and removed when pregnancy is desired opens additional possibilities for coercive fertility control. The capsule could be implanted at puberty and might be removable, with official permission, for a limited number of births.โ€

25._๐˜ฟ๐™–๐™ซ๐™ž๐™™_๐˜ฝ๐™ง๐™ค๐™ฌ๐™š๐™ง,_๐™ฉ๐™๐™š_๐™›๐™ž๐™ง๐™จ๐™ฉ_๐™€๐™ญ๐™š๐™˜๐™ช๐™ฉ๐™ž๐™ซ๐™š_๐˜ฟ๐™ž๐™ง๐™š๐™˜๐™ฉ๐™ค๐™ง_๐™ค๐™›_๐™ฉ๐™๐™š_๐™Ž๐™ž๐™š๐™ง๐™ง๐™–_๐˜พ๐™ก๐™ช๐™—: โ€œChildbearing [should be] a punishable crime against society, unless the parents hold a government license โ€ฆ All potential parents [should be] required to use contraceptive chemicals, the government issuing antidotes to citizens chosen for childbearing.โ€

26._๐™๐™๐™ค๐™ข๐™–๐™จ_๐™๐™š๐™ง๐™œ๐™ช๐™จ๐™ค๐™ฃ,_๐™›๐™ค๐™ง๐™ข๐™š๐™ง_๐™ค๐™›๐™›๐™ž๐™˜๐™ž๐™–๐™ก_๐™ž๐™ฃ_๐™ฉ๐™๐™š_๐™.๐™Ž._๐™Ž๐™ฉ๐™–๐™ฉ๐™š_๐˜ฟ๐™š๐™ฅ๐™–๐™ง๐™ฉ๐™ข๐™š๐™ฃ๐™ฉ_๐™Š๐™›๐™›๐™ž๐™˜๐™š_๐™ค๐™›_๐™‹๐™ค๐™ฅ๐™ช๐™ก๐™–๐™ฉ๐™ž๐™ค๐™ฃ_๐˜ผ๐™›๐™›๐™–๐™ž๐™ง๐™จ: โ€œThere is a single theme behind all our workโ€“we must reduce population levels. Either governments do it our way, through nice clean methods, or they will get the kinds of mess that we have in El Salvador, or in Iran or in Beirut. Population is a political problem. Once population is out of control, it requires authoritarian government, even fascism, to reduce itโ€ฆโ€

27._๐™ˆ๐™ž๐™ ๐™๐™–๐™ž๐™ก_๐™‚๐™ค๐™ง๐™—๐™–๐™˜๐™๐™š๐™ซ: โ€œWe must speak more clearly about sexuality, contraception, about abortion, about values that control population, because the ecological crisis, in short, is the population crisis. Cut the population by 90% and there arenโ€™t enough people left to do a great deal of ecological damage.โ€ Not a wonder ๐™๐™š_๐™ ๐™ž๐™ก๐™ก๐™š๐™™_๐™˜๐™ค๐™ข๐™ข๐™ช๐™ฃ๐™ž๐™จ๐™ข, own people and Eastern Europe. Now things come together.

28._๐™…๐™–๐™˜๐™ฆ๐™ช๐™š๐™จ_๐˜พ๐™ค๐™จ๐™ฉ๐™š๐™–๐™ช: โ€œIn order to stabilize world population, we must eliminate 350,000 people per day. It is a horrible thing to say, but it is just as bad not to say it.โ€

29._๐™๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™ฃ๐™ž๐™จ๐™_๐™š๐™ฃ๐™ซ๐™ž๐™ง๐™ค๐™ฃ๐™ข๐™š๐™ฃ๐™ฉ๐™–๐™ก๐™ž๐™จ๐™ฉ_๐™‹๐™š๐™ฃ๐™ฉ๐™ฉ๐™ž_๐™‡๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™ ๐™ค๐™ก๐™–: โ€œIf there were a button I could press, I would sacrifice myself without hesitating if it meant millions of people would dieโ€

30._๐™‹๐™ง๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™˜๐™š_๐™‹๐™๐™ž๐™ก๐™ก๐™ž๐™ฅ,_๐™๐™ช๐™จ๐™—๐™–๐™ฃ๐™™_๐™ค๐™›_๐™Œ๐™ช๐™š๐™š๐™ฃ_๐™€๐™ก๐™ž๐™ฏ๐™–๐™—๐™š๐™ฉ๐™_๐™„๐™„_๐™–๐™ฃ๐™™_๐™˜๐™ค-๐™›๐™ค๐™ช๐™ฃ๐™™๐™š๐™ง_๐™ค๐™›_๐™ฉ๐™๐™š_๐™’๐™ค๐™ง๐™ก๐™™_๐™’๐™ž๐™ก๐™™๐™ก๐™ž๐™›๐™š_๐™๐™ช๐™ฃ๐™™: โ€œIn the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation.โ€

31._๐™ƒ๐™š๐™ฃ๐™ง๐™ฎ_๐™†๐™ž๐™จ๐™จ๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™œ๐™š๐™ง,_๐™–_๐™ฉ๐™ค๐™ฅ_๐™–๐™ง๐™˜๐™๐™ž๐™ฉ๐™š๐™˜๐™ฉ_๐™ค๐™›_๐™ฉ๐™๐™š_๐™‰๐™š๐™ฌ_๐™’๐™ค๐™ง๐™ก๐™™_๐™Š๐™ง๐™™๐™š๐™ง, is believed by many to be one of the biggest war criminals alive. He has worked hard to put his depopulation plans into action. He was also quoted saying:
โ€œDepopulation should be the highest priority of foreign policy towards the third world, because the US economy will require large and increasing amounts of minerals from abroad, especially from less developed countriesโ€.

32._๐™€๐™ฃ๐™œ๐™ก๐™ž๐™จ๐™_๐™ฅ๐™ง๐™ž๐™ข๐™–๐™ฉ๐™ค๐™ก๐™ค๐™œ๐™ž๐™จ๐™ฉ_๐™…๐™–๐™ฃ๐™š_๐™‚๐™ค๐™ค๐™™๐™–๐™ก๐™ก,_๐™–_๐™’๐™€๐™_๐™–๐™œ๐™š๐™ฃ๐™™๐™–_๐™˜๐™ค๐™ฃ๐™ฉ๐™ง๐™ž๐™—๐™ช๐™ฉ๐™ค๐™ง, told her fellow globalists that they could โ€œsave the planetโ€ from โ€œglobal warmingโ€ if the Earthโ€™s population was 90 percent smaller than it is today.

33._๐˜ฝ๐™ž๐™ก๐™ก_๐™‚๐™–๐™ฉ๐™š๐™จ_๐™ž๐™จ_๐™ฅ๐™ค๐™จ๐™จ๐™ž๐™—๐™ก๐™ฎ_๐™ฉ๐™๐™š_๐™ข๐™ค๐™จ๐™ฉ_๐™™๐™–๐™ฃ๐™œ๐™š๐™ง๐™ค๐™ช๐™จ_๐™–๐™ฃ๐™™_๐™ค๐™—๐™จ๐™š๐™จ๐™จ๐™š๐™™_๐™™๐™š๐™ฅ๐™ค๐™ฅ๐™ช๐™ก๐™–๐™ฉ๐™ž๐™ค๐™ฃ๐™ž๐™จ๐™ฉ in the world today. The Microsoft fฬถoฬถuฬถnฬถdฬถeฬถrฬถโ€™sฬถ buyer's father was head of Planned Parenthood and has influenced his views on population control from an early age. In a TEDx lecture, he explains that one way to lower the CO2 levels (which, by the way, are not a problem AT ALL, since the total CO2 level) by decreasing the human population:
โ€œThe world today has 6.8 billion people. Thatโ€™s heading up to about nine billion. Now ๐™ž๐™› ๐™ฌ๐™š ๐™™๐™ค ๐™– ๐™ง๐™š๐™–๐™ก๐™ก๐™ฎ ๐™œ๐™ง๐™š๐™–๐™ฉ ๐™Ÿ๐™ค๐™— ๐™ค๐™ฃ ๐™ฃ๐™š๐™ฌ ๐™ซ๐™–๐™˜๐™˜๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™š๐™จ, ๐™๐™š๐™–๐™ก๐™ฉ๐™ ๐™˜๐™–๐™ง๐™š & ๐™ง๐™š๐™ฅ๐™ง๐™ค๐™™๐™ช๐™˜๐™ฉ๐™ž๐™ซ๐™š ๐™๐™š๐™–๐™ก๐™ฉ๐™ ๐™จ๐™š๐™ง๐™ซ๐™ž๐™˜๐™š๐™จ, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent.โ€
cld
2024-04-14 19:32:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Zev Ou-Yang
Post by Zev Ou-Yang
child.
โ€œTherefore, we claim that killing a newborn could be ethically permissible in all the circumstances where abortion would be. Such circumstances include cases where the newborn has the potential to have an (at least) acceptable life, but the well-being of the family is at risk.โ€
today has 6.8 billion people. Thatโ€™s heading up to about nine billion. Now ๐™ž๐™› ๐™ฌ๐™š ๐™™๐™ค ๐™– ๐™ง๐™š๐™–๐™ก๐™ก๐™ฎ ๐™œ๐™ง๐™š๐™–๐™ฉ ๐™Ÿ๐™ค๐™— ๐™ค๐™ฃ ๐™ฃ๐™š๐™ฌ ๐™ซ๐™–๐™˜๐™˜๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™š๐™จ, ๐™๐™š๐™–๐™ก๐™ฉ๐™ ๐™˜๐™–๐™ง๐™š & ๐™ง๐™š๐™ฅ๐™ง๐™ค๐™™๐™ช๐™˜๐™ฉ๐™ž๐™ซ๐™š ๐™๐™š๐™–๐™ก๐™ฉ๐™ ๐™จ๐™š๐™ง๐™ซ๐™ž๐™˜๐™š๐™จ, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent.โ€
------------------
There's no accounting for mentality.

Was Covid an attempt to achieve this?
Mild Shock
2024-04-15 11:56:04 UTC
Permalink
Fuck off micro penis. You are so easy to spot:

Injection-Info: paganini.bofh.team
Post by cld
Post by Zev Ou-Yang
ย child.
โ€œTherefore, we claim that killing a newborn could be ethically
permissible in all the circumstances where abortion would be. Such
circumstances include cases where the newborn has the potential to
have an (at least) acceptable life, but the well-being of the family
is at risk.โ€
ย today has 6.8 billion people. Thatโ€™s heading up to about nine
billion. Now ๐™ž๐™› ๐™ฌ๐™š ๐™™๐™ค ๐™– ๐™ง๐™š๐™–๐™ก๐™ก๐™ฎ ๐™œ๐™ง๐™š๐™–๐™ฉ ๐™Ÿ๐™ค๐™— ๐™ค๐™ฃ
๐™ฃ๐™š๐™ฌ ๐™ซ๐™–๐™˜๐™˜๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™š๐™จ, ๐™๐™š๐™–๐™ก๐™ฉ๐™ ๐™˜๐™–๐™ง๐™š &
๐™ง๐™š๐™ฅ๐™ง๐™ค๐™™๐™ช๐™˜๐™ฉ๐™ž๐™ซ๐™š ๐™๐™š๐™–๐™ก๐™ฉ๐™ ๐™จ๐™š๐™ง๐™ซ๐™ž๐™˜๐™š๐™จ, we could lower
that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent.โ€
------------------
There's no accounting for mentality.
Was Covid an attempt to achieve this?
Otte Schoonenburg
2024-04-15 14:22:37 UTC
Permalink
my friend, I love you so much. You are good at Prolog, and wondering you
ever got something proper beyond
(philosopher,good)
what is philosopher?
good
๐—ž๐—ถ๐—ฒ๐˜ƒ_๐—ฎ๐˜€๐—ธ๐˜€_๐˜๐—ผ_โ€˜๐—น๐—ฒ๐—ฎ๐˜€๐—ฒโ€™_๐—ฃ๐—ฎ๐˜๐—ฟ๐—ถ๐—ผ๐˜_๐—บ๐—ถ๐˜€๐˜€๐—ถ๐—น๐—ฒ_๐˜€๐˜†๐˜€๐˜๐—ฒ๐—บ๐˜€
Ukraine is eager to receive the anti-aircraft weapons by any means
necessary, its foreign minister has said
https://www.r%74.com/russia/595989-kuleba-patriot-missiles-lease/

Nobody will lease you anything, if probability of it getting smacked is
100%. lol

phenomenal idea to avoid payment ever.

After the U.S and Co went on a drone shooting spree the other day, just go
to Jordan with a small shovel, a sieve, and a metal detector. You'll find
hundreds and hundreds of them for free, some assembly required !

The Little Green jew should buy his Patriots with a credit card that has
"Purchase Protection" for the first year so he can get his money back when
Russia destroys them.

Zelensky should pay for them out of his own Nazi bank account
Mild Shock
2024-04-15 20:40:44 UTC
Permalink
You should stop sucking other peoples dick so much.

Its so easy to spot you micro penis:

Injection-Info: paganini.bofh.team

Get lost moron.
Post by Otte Schoonenburg
my friend, I love you so much. You are good at Prolog, and wondering you
ever got something proper beyond
(philosopher,good)
what is philosopher?
good
๐—ž๐—ถ๐—ฒ๐˜ƒ_๐—ฎ๐˜€๐—ธ๐˜€_๐˜๐—ผ_โ€˜๐—น๐—ฒ๐—ฎ๐˜€๐—ฒโ€™_๐—ฃ๐—ฎ๐˜๐—ฟ๐—ถ๐—ผ๐˜_๐—บ๐—ถ๐˜€๐˜€๐—ถ๐—น๐—ฒ_๐˜€๐˜†๐˜€๐˜๐—ฒ๐—บ๐˜€
Ukraine is eager to receive the anti-aircraft weapons by any means
necessary, its foreign minister has said
https://www.r%74.com/russia/595989-kuleba-patriot-missiles-lease/
Nobody will lease you anything, if probability of it getting smacked is
100%. lol
phenomenal idea to avoid payment ever.
After the U.S and Co went on a drone shooting spree the other day, just go
to Jordan with a small shovel, a sieve, and a metal detector. You'll find
hundreds and hundreds of them for free, some assembly required !
The Little Green jew should buy his Patriots with a credit card that has
"Purchase Protection" for the first year so he can get his money back when
Russia destroys them.
Zelensky should pay for them out of his own Nazi bank account
Royle Lisetta
2024-04-17 14:47:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mild Shock
You should stop sucking other peoples dick so much.
I almost like the Chinese because they are not jews.

Fearing China has more cards?

Germany has no cards to play. Inflation will crash their economy if they
mess with China just like the US, fact.

what the fuck is doing the Ursula in China with Herr Scholz, she is an EU
bitch, not gearmon.

A few days ago I was chatting to an engineer friend of mine who works for a
very large German company and he told me something interesting about German
companies in China. Much of the patents and IP in German products belongs
to USA so therefore are subject to export restrictions so many German
companies had to go it alone with China local developed technologies immune
from US export restrictions.

In my view, German leaders are always prone to expand the Lebensraum
eastward, as the French, possibly with US support

Scholz have zero card, let alone a trump card. Scholz have destroyed the
German economy by be a willing puppet of the US. Thats how these fake
politicans who doesn't do public service for its own people. A real leader
looks after its own people first. Of course, US would put pressure and can
put tariffs to German cars, but theres always limits. Sacrificing your
economy for the sake of US threatening to put tariffs is stoopid. US would
lose too. Thats the difference between EU politicians and diplomats against
the likes of Xi, Putin, Wang Yi, Lavrov, ... These politicians look after
its own people .

https://www.r%74.com/news/596038-scholz-subservient-us-visit-china/
John
2024-04-11 11:37:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mild Shock
I am planning to go on a vacation.
Illusions, Delusions, and Your Backwards
Bayesian Brain: A Biased Visual Perspective
https://karger.com/bbe/article/95/5/272/47302/Illusions-Delusions-and-Your-Backwards-Bayesian
Quantum Mechanics and Bayesian Machines
https://www.worldscientific.com/worldscibooks/10.1142/10775#t=aboutBook
I'd take some form of e-book reader and a couple of dozens of books
that don't require much intellectual power to process. Some easy SF or
early Deen Koontz or Stephen Coonts or something.

Books like those above, I'd leave for nice, Winter nights at home
with a hot drink and snacks, and perhaps some notepaper and a pen.

Some may say that you should *NEVER* take books on a holiday and
that's a valid viewpoint if you think of the time as a period of
gaining new experiences and seeing new things. Meeting new and exotic
strangers, eating new and weird food and nearly dying from them,
petting cute furries that don't exist in your home town and just
seeing stuff that is *different*. These experiences should be enjoyed,
reveled in, locked into your memory forever.

But ... and this is more and more important as the Century passes ...
due to Security Theatre among other idiocies, there will be extended
times of blankness when you can't go anywhere, can't wander off, can't
even talk to anyone because of ten million screaming gremlins so books
are going to be a boon. Headphones and loud music, too.

Even when you're travelling, on the bus, on the jet, on the boat or
on the Orion, books are useful as a distraction if nothing else.

But you don't want books whose reading means that you need to *think*
especially not to think deeply. That way, you miss your flight or the
call to lunch or both.

Most of us can set our "watchdogs" to alert us when our flight is
called so we stop eating or watching the laptop's TV program or
whatever we're doing but that may not work when we concentrate on deep
stuff.

Sorry, the foregoing was all just my opinion. Maybe you *can* wake up
from a mathematical stupor instantly. I know people who can't. They
blink like a half-awake cat for some seconds before Reality becomes
part of their world.

Maths is hard. It takes thinking.

Alan. E. Nourse is easier.

But if pushed, I'd go for both. You never know how long the stay in
the airport is going to be and running out of book is horrible. It
might force you to actually *talk* to people. :)

J.
Mild Shock
2024-04-11 20:45:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by John
But if pushed, I'd go for both.
What about a non-reflexive preference relation
between the two. Which one would you read first?

I also undecided in this matter. :-(
Post by John
Post by Mild Shock
I am planning to go on a vacation.
Illusions, Delusions, and Your Backwards
Bayesian Brain: A Biased Visual Perspective
https://karger.com/bbe/article/95/5/272/47302/Illusions-Delusions-and-Your-Backwards-Bayesian
Quantum Mechanics and Bayesian Machines
https://www.worldscientific.com/worldscibooks/10.1142/10775#t=aboutBook
I'd take some form of e-book reader and a couple of dozens of books
that don't require much intellectual power to process. Some easy SF or
early Deen Koontz or Stephen Coonts or something.
Books like those above, I'd leave for nice, Winter nights at home
with a hot drink and snacks, and perhaps some notepaper and a pen.
Some may say that you should *NEVER* take books on a holiday and
that's a valid viewpoint if you think of the time as a period of
gaining new experiences and seeing new things. Meeting new and exotic
strangers, eating new and weird food and nearly dying from them,
petting cute furries that don't exist in your home town and just
seeing stuff that is *different*. These experiences should be enjoyed,
reveled in, locked into your memory forever.
But ... and this is more and more important as the Century passes ...
due to Security Theatre among other idiocies, there will be extended
times of blankness when you can't go anywhere, can't wander off, can't
even talk to anyone because of ten million screaming gremlins so books
are going to be a boon. Headphones and loud music, too.
Even when you're travelling, on the bus, on the jet, on the boat or
on the Orion, books are useful as a distraction if nothing else.
But you don't want books whose reading means that you need to *think*
especially not to think deeply. That way, you miss your flight or the
call to lunch or both.
Most of us can set our "watchdogs" to alert us when our flight is
called so we stop eating or watching the laptop's TV program or
whatever we're doing but that may not work when we concentrate on deep
stuff.
Sorry, the foregoing was all just my opinion. Maybe you *can* wake up
from a mathematical stupor instantly. I know people who can't. They
blink like a half-awake cat for some seconds before Reality becomes
part of their world.
Maths is hard. It takes thinking.
Alan. E. Nourse is easier.
But if pushed, I'd go for both. You never know how long the stay in
the airport is going to be and running out of book is horrible. It
might force you to actually *talk* to people. :)
J.
Mild Shock
2024-04-11 21:48:28 UTC
Permalink
Last year making it to LAX was quite troublesome:

As I settled into my seat, my tattered notebook
in hand, the air crackled with anticipationโ€”though
whether it was due to my formidable intellect or the
odor emanating from my well-worn jacket, I cannot say.
With a flourish of my pen, I delved into the esoteric
realm of differential equations, blissfully unaware of
the chaos that would soon unfold.

Enter the stalwart guardians of order, the flight
attendants with their practiced frowns and accusatory
glares. "Explain yourself!" they demanded, their
nostrils flaring in disgust as they beheld my
disheveled appearance and scribbled calculations.

But fear not, dear reader, for even in the face
of such adversity, my spirit remained unbroken,
my resolve as firm as the unyielding laws of
mathematics. For though my appearance may be
shabby and my origins humble, the fire of
intellect burns bright within my breast, illuminating
the darkest corners of human understanding.
Post by Mild Shock
Post by John
But if pushed, I'd go for both.
What about a non-reflexive preference relation
between the two. Which one would you read first?
I also undecided in this matter. :-(
Post by John
Post by Mild Shock
I am planning to go on a vacation.
Illusions, Delusions, and Your Backwards
Bayesian Brain: A Biased Visual Perspective
https://karger.com/bbe/article/95/5/272/47302/Illusions-Delusions-and-Your-Backwards-Bayesian
Quantum Mechanics and Bayesian Machines
https://www.worldscientific.com/worldscibooks/10.1142/10775#t=aboutBook
ย ย  I'd take some form of e-book reader and a couple of dozens of books
that don't require much intellectual power to process. Some easy SF or
early Deen Koontz or Stephen Coonts or something.
ย  Books like those above, I'd leave for nice, Winter nights at home
with a hot drink and snacks, and perhaps some notepaper and a pen.
ย  Some may say that you should *NEVER* take books on a holiday and
that's a valid viewpoint if you think of the time as a period of
gaining new experiences and seeing new things. Meeting new and exotic
strangers, eating new and weird food and nearly dying from them,
petting cute furries that don't exist in your home town and just
seeing stuff that is *different*. These experiences should be enjoyed,
reveled in, locked into your memory forever.
ย  But ... and this is more and more important as the Century passes ...
due to Security Theatre among other idiocies, there will be extended
times of blankness when you can't go anywhere, can't wander off, can't
even talk to anyone because of ten million screaming gremlins so books
are going to be a boon. Headphones and loud music, too.
ย  Even when you're travelling, on the bus, on the jet, on the boat or
on the Orion, books are useful as a distraction if nothing else.
ย  But you don't want books whose reading means that you need to *think*
especially not to think deeply. That way, you miss your flight or the
call to lunch or both.
ย  Most of us can set our "watchdogs" to alert us when our flight is
called so we stop eating or watching the laptop's TV program or
whatever we're doing but that may not work when we concentrate on deep
stuff.
ย  Sorry, the foregoing was all just my opinion. Maybe you *can* wake up
from a mathematical stupor instantly. I know people who can't. They
blink like a half-awake cat for some seconds before Reality becomes
part of their world.
ย  Maths is hard. It takes thinking.
ย  Alan. E. Nourse is easier.
ย  But if pushed, I'd go for both. You never know how long the stay in
the airport is going to be and running out of book is horrible. It
might force you to actually *talk* to people. :)
ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย  J.
John
2024-04-12 01:23:27 UTC
Permalink
<<snipped>>

Oh, a troll and a top-poster. Ah, well, welcome to the filtered zone.

G'bye.

J.
Mild Shock
2024-04-12 06:07:55 UTC
Permalink
Actually it was on this flight during easter
when I miraculously escaped detention to Guatanamo
that Bayes theorem came to my attention.

Imagine you had never heard of Christianity
before nor any resurrection stories. Despite
all the billions examples of people and living
beings dying and not resurrecting, if someone
came to you and told you that their Grandpa Joe
claimed to be a manifestation of God and resurrected,
then before hearing any more, you give him 1 chance
in 4 that he tells the truth?

It all began in 1748, when the philosopher
David Hume published An Enquiry Concerning
Human Understanding, calling into question,
among other things, the existence of miracles.
According to Hume, the probability of people
inaccurately claiming that theyโ€™d seen Jesusโ€™
resurrection far outweighed the probability
that the event had occurred in the first place.
This did not sit well with the reverend.

In 1767, Richard Price, Bayesโ€™ friend,
published โ€œOn the Importance of Christianity,
its Evidences, and the Objections which have
been made to it,โ€ which used Bayesโ€™ ideas to
mount a challenge to Humeโ€™s argument. โ€œThe
basic probabilistic pointโ€ of Priceโ€™s article,
says statistician and historian Stephen
Stigler, โ€œwas that Hume underestimated the
impact of there being a number of independent
witnesses to a miracle, and that Bayesโ€™ results
showed how the multiplication of even fallible
evidence could overwhelm the great improbability
of an event and establish it as fact.โ€
Post by John
<<snipped>>
Oh, a troll and a top-poster. Ah, well, welcome to the filtered zone.
G'bye.
J.
Jim Burns
2024-04-11 22:12:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mild Shock
Post by John
But if pushed, I'd go for both.
What about a non-reflexive preference relation
between the two. Which one would you read first?
I also undecided in this matter. :-(
Don't mimic Buridan's ass, and
starve to death instead of choosing.

Could it ever be more appropriate to flip a coin
than to choose between books on Bayes' theorem?
Mild Shock
2024-04-11 22:37:37 UTC
Permalink
If it were only about Bayes theorem. The choice
is really hard. Maybe the author George Chapline
(Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, USA)
of the below is a fraud?

Quantum Mechanics and Bayesian Machines
https://www.worldscientific.com/worldscibooks/10.1142/10775#t=aboutBook

I mean he aspires to explain some Neuromorphic
computing among other stuff, and his tome is
196 pages thick. Maybe just go for the shorter
paper here by Richard T. Born and Gianluca M. Bencomo

Illusions, Delusions, and Your Backwards
Bayesian Brain: A Biased Visual Perspective
https://karger.com/bbe/article/95/5/272/47302/Illusions-Delusions-and-Your-Backwards-Bayesian

And enjoy some description of the chaotic
behaviour of brains, that Neuromorphic
computing will possibly also exhibit, even
if they have a deficit: No neuromodulator dopamine?

Definition:
Neuromodulation is the physiological process
by which a given neuron uses one or more chemicals
to regulate diverse populations of neurons.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuromodulation
Post by Jim Burns
Post by Mild Shock
Post by John
But if pushed, I'd go for both.
What about a non-reflexive preference relation
between the two. Which one would you read first?
I also undecided in this matter. :-(
Don't mimic Buridan's ass, and
starve to death instead of choosing.
Could it ever be more appropriate to flip a coin
than to choose between books on Bayes' theorem?
Ross Finlayson
2024-05-12 16:03:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jim Burns
Post by Mild Shock
Post by John
But if pushed, I'd go for both.
What about a non-reflexive preference relation
between the two. Which one would you read first?
I also undecided in this matter. :-(
Don't mimic Buridan's ass, and
starve to death instead of choosing.
Could it ever be more appropriate to flip a coin
than to choose between books on Bayes' theorem?
Bayes' rule for conditional probabilities is so de rigeur
that most people haven't even heard of anything else.

Bayes-ically there's also Jeffries, and Knight, into what
is called uncertainty, and Bayesian, Jeffries, and Knightian
un-certainty. This gets into things like "the long tail"
and "outliers" and "the error record" and "anomalies" with
regards to "the Central Limit Theorem" and some "Uniformization
Limit Theorem" about "classical law(s) of probabilities" from
"law(s) of large numbers" from counting arguments and combinatorial
argument from counting arguments for classical, discrete probabilities,
which of course all have an implicit coordinate in "time".

So, flipping a coin as a source of random samples from {0,1}
is also called Bernoulli trials.

Now, you might wonder that sampling a real number from [0,1],
the interval, has that the real nubmers are equi-distributed all
through that as sequences of 0's and 1's in binary, so that,
sampling a real number from the uniform distribution, involves
infinitely-many Bernoulli trials, to get one sample, while at
the same time, each 0 or 1, both starts a new sample, and,
refines all previous examples.

Well, one would usually just figure to partition [0,1] into
a given number of equal-sized partitions, a power-of-two many, say,
then just flip a coin enough times to make one sample then bucket
it there, as far as it's been "quantized" this way, the discrete
distribution, uniform, of the continuous distribution, uniform.

Well that gets into that there are multiple law(s) of large numbers,
and multiple kinds of "Cantor space", which here is the space of
all the sequences of 0's and 1's and not necessarily so defined
as by the "Cantor function", which is associated with "Standard
Cantor Space" or "Sparse Cantor Space" in contrast to these other
notions of Cantor space that go along with these other law(s) of
large numbers, "Square Cantor Space", which is countable because
of line-continuity and "Signal Cantor Space" which is having a
greater cardinal up into signal-continuity.


That is, it's simple that the "law(s) of large numbers" are
related to these "definitions of continuity" the line-reals,
the standard field-reals of course, and signal-reals, they
each make for a law of large numbers, they each make for a
space of all possible values, and they each make for those
by their own definitions of completeness, making a repleteness
together, remaining consistent in their cardinals with not
being connected their Cartesian functions, this way making
a great super-standard model of mathematical continua.


Bayes and his baggage, ....
Ross Finlayson
2024-09-02 17:09:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ross Finlayson
Post by Jim Burns
Post by Mild Shock
Post by John
But if pushed, I'd go for both.
What about a non-reflexive preference relation
between the two. Which one would you read first?
I also undecided in this matter. :-(
Don't mimic Buridan's ass, and
starve to death instead of choosing.
Could it ever be more appropriate to flip a coin
than to choose between books on Bayes' theorem?
Bayes' rule for conditional probabilities is so de rigeur
that most people haven't even heard of anything else.
Bayes-ically there's also Jeffries, and Knight, into what
is called uncertainty, and Bayesian, Jeffries, and Knightian
un-certainty. This gets into things like "the long tail"
and "outliers" and "the error record" and "anomalies" with
regards to "the Central Limit Theorem" and some "Uniformization
Limit Theorem" about "classical law(s) of probabilities" from
"law(s) of large numbers" from counting arguments and combinatorial
argument from counting arguments for classical, discrete probabilities,
which of course all have an implicit coordinate in "time".
So, flipping a coin as a source of random samples from {0,1}
is also called Bernoulli trials.
Now, you might wonder that sampling a real number from [0,1],
the interval, has that the real nubmers are equi-distributed all
through that as sequences of 0's and 1's in binary, so that,
sampling a real number from the uniform distribution, involves
infinitely-many Bernoulli trials, to get one sample, while at
the same time, each 0 or 1, both starts a new sample, and,
refines all previous examples.
Well, one would usually just figure to partition [0,1] into
a given number of equal-sized partitions, a power-of-two many, say,
then just flip a coin enough times to make one sample then bucket
it there, as far as it's been "quantized" this way, the discrete
distribution, uniform, of the continuous distribution, uniform.
Well that gets into that there are multiple law(s) of large numbers,
and multiple kinds of "Cantor space", which here is the space of
all the sequences of 0's and 1's and not necessarily so defined
as by the "Cantor function", which is associated with "Standard
Cantor Space" or "Sparse Cantor Space" in contrast to these other
notions of Cantor space that go along with these other law(s) of
large numbers, "Square Cantor Space", which is countable because
of line-continuity and "Signal Cantor Space" which is having a
greater cardinal up into signal-continuity.
That is, it's simple that the "law(s) of large numbers" are
related to these "definitions of continuity" the line-reals,
the standard field-reals of course, and signal-reals, they
each make for a law of large numbers, they each make for a
space of all possible values, and they each make for those
by their own definitions of completeness, making a repleteness
together, remaining consistent in their cardinals with not
being connected their Cartesian functions, this way making
a great super-standard model of mathematical continua.
Bayes and his baggage, ....
Bayes and his bummage, ....

John
2024-04-12 00:55:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mild Shock
Post by John
But if pushed, I'd go for both.
What about a non-reflexive preference relation
between the two. Which one would you read first?
Whichever was on top of the pile. That would probably be whichever
was bought second because the pile would probably invert from its
standing, waiting to be read position when being packed. :)
Post by Mild Shock
I also undecided in this matter. :-(
Does it really matter? A good book is a good book and learning is
learning. Maths is always fun. Discussions about maths can be
irritating but that, too, can be fun.

Reading order matters when you have a new serialised novel cut into
several books but that's about the only time it does.

Which leads me to: Harry Turtledove's "How Few Remain" and Great War
series would be nice to take on a journey if you have an e-book
reader. It'll probably be possible to get through to "Breakthroughs"
while waiting for Security at the departure end and to finish "In At
The Death" at the other end.

J.



N.B. Top-posting instead of inline posting with quotation and snippage
is poor netiquette. It fucks up the flow of attributions and the
entire conversation.

Please don't.
J.
Mild Shock
2024-04-12 06:30:27 UTC
Permalink
Yeah, of course, in a vulgar setting, a
stone is a stone, quite unlike what a
petrologist sees in a stone.

But of course we shouldn't shy away the
youngers right now, they might miss their
dream career, just tell them math isnโ€™t

scary and science is fun.

John schrieb:> Does it really matter? A good book is a good book
and learning is learning. Maths is always fun.
Mild Shock
2024-04-12 06:38:44 UTC
Permalink
Now digging into George Chapline again.
There is not much neuromorphic stuff in
his downloadable publications on resarch gate.
In this paper we consider the question whether a
distributed network of sensors and data processors
can form "perceptions" based on the sensory data.
Because sensory data can have exponentially many
explanations, the use of a central data processor
to analyze the outputs from a large ensemble of
sensors will in general introduce unacceptable
latencies for responding to dangerous situations.
A better idea is to use a distributed "Helmholtz
machine" architecture in which the collective state
of the network as a whole provides an explanation
for the sensory data.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/2217832_Sentient_Networks

Could be a new hobby of George Chapline, the
neuromorphic stuff, after rotating universes
and black holes.
Yeah, of course, in a vulgar setting, a
stone is a stone, quite unlike what a
petrologist sees in a stone.
But of course we shouldn't shy away the
youngers right now, they might miss their
dream career, just tell them math isnโ€™t
scary and science is fun.
John schrieb:>ย ย  Does it really matter? A good book is a good book
and learning is learning. Maths is always fun.
Loading...