My Photo

May 2018

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31    

BlogStats


« America's Dunkirk Foreign Policy | Main | 'Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain' (updated 26feb15) »

22 February 2015

Comments

Bill  Tozer

On the Democrat side, former President Bill Clinton just threw his support behind Joe Biden.

https://www.facebook.com/PatriotPost/photos/a.82108390913.80726.51560645913/10152819516495914/?type=1&theater

Russ Steele

In a paper titled Algorithm Aversion the authors write:

Research shows that evidence-based algorithms more accurately predict the future than do human forecasters. Yet, when forecasters are deciding whether to use a human forecaster or a statistical algorithm, they often choose the human forecaster. This phenomenon, which we call algorithm aversion, is costly, and it is important to understand its causes. We show that people are especially averse to algorithmic forecasters after seeing them perform, even when they see them outperform a human forecaster. This is because people more quickly lose confidence in algorithmic than human forecasters after seeing them make the same mistake. In five studies, participants either saw an algorithm make forecasts, a human make forecasts, both, or neither. They then decided whether to tie their incentives to the future predictions of the algorithm or the human. Participants who saw the algorithm perform were less confident in it, and less likely to choose it over an inferior human forecaster. This was true even among those who saw the algorithm outperform the human.

It will be interesting to see how readers treat George's analysis, which uses an algorithm to calculate the probability of an event, based on human input, with adjustments being made as more precise information becomes available. Humans and algorithms working together to produce a better answer to a complex question.

- See more at: http://marginalrevolution.com/#sthash.iktqv9xQ.dpuf

George Rebane

RussS 727am - And then there are the prediction algos used surreptitiously by humans. The algo does the predicting - unaided, or aided as here - and the human delivers the prediction without mentioning what he did in the back room.

Today, as you point out, the best predictors are still the cooperative ones. For example, in this Prediction Derby the iterative method of applying Bayes rule allows us to focus independently on each peace of evidence with the confidence that all previous evidence has already been properly encoded in the prior probability which we now combine with the new evidence considered only on its merits.

Sure wish some of the other readers start bringing up new evidence and assigned likelihoods, because it's certain I'm not covering the whole waterfront with these candidates.

Brad C.

I don't know if this has been factored in but I think there has to be a weight given to the idea of "it's their turn". Both Clinton and Bush would benefit from this.
Then again, there might be a "burn out" factor associated with candidates like Bush and Clinton family members who keep popping up during election cycles like praire dogs.
Maybe the two factors cancel each other out.

George Rebane

BradC 1101am - You have a point there. It can be argued that Clinton and Bush have a wind at their back in wanting to make a 'clean sweep' for their dynasty. How much more likely do feel that such a sentiment is for each? Note, they don't have to be the same for both.

Todd Juvinall

Warren will be the democrat winner. Clinton has taken too much foreign money.

Walt

Yes Todd, Clinton has explaining to do. More info here.
http://dailycaller.com/2015/02/22/meet-hillarys-welfare-queens/
The Clinton foundation took in plenty of questionable moneys while she was Sec. of State.
( Pay to play?)
As for Warren, it's wild that people would vote for a proven liar. Is that just a LIB thing?

Seems "my guy" Walker is holding well. LIBS are going after his dropping out of collage,, but I say,, BIG DEAL.. Look what academia has got us. ( That's all "O" and Co. is.)
OK,, so their book smart,,but practical stupid. The currant admin is in it for the power and perks, and don't give a rat's ass about the real state of the country.

Bill  Tozer

Mr. Walt, Warren could win the Dem Primary if she runs. But a national election? Just like Congresswoman Dildo Debbie down in Florida. She can win the Dem primaries in Florida, but can she keep her job? I bet Carly runs for something in 2016.

Walt

Bill ol' buddy, It may be a cold day in Hell before a LIB ever gets elected as President again. Obummer has seen to that. He makes Carter look like a statesman.

There is a good story out on Walker, and how the people of the state are better off since he cut the balls off the unions. Yup,, the unions are singing the blues in soprano.
Even the ones still in the unions are removing their "pro union" bumper stickers.
The shoe is on the other foot. It's the union goons that are getting terrorized this time.
( Payback's a bitch)

It will be fun to see how Ca. working Lefties vote, since that great Obamacare is really biting them in the ass. The cost as we all know has gone WAY up.. Not down as promised.
The only ones cheering for it are the underclass who don't pay jack.

Don Bessee

Given CA's massive influence in money todays Senator and Gov 2016 election issues are complicating things for the dems. So we have LA's Villagrosa saying no to sen, which is a yes to gov, bummer gavin. There are other potential dems and r (run condi run) that are going to help splinter the state. Those candidates are all over the place on potential dem prez candidates. What think you gentlemen?

Bill  Tozer

Who will be the first to throw therir hat into the ring? The primaries are a year and some change away. We all expect Hillary to jump in. Oppps, Barry Sanders has thrown his hat in the ring, me bad. Will Hillary move to the left or move to the middle before the primaries. Or, will she ooze into a nice warm purple?

http://www.vox.com/2015/2/27/8117611/hillary-clinton-bipartisanship

Well, at least she is trying to find the right words. Maybe purple is the new catchphrase for Loser.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad