This article reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of Bayesian statistics by the author, when they say "for the sake of simplicity, let's call it a wash and assume the odds are the same". Because the odds ratio is key…
Yeah, you're right, thank you. This is why you shouldn't do math past midnight, I guess :).
I might have a proof that this list is complete (I am very tired though and should be sleeping instead of doing this, so my apologies if I'm wrong): Because we can only get one extra by carrying, each digit of 2^(k - 1)…
This article reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of Bayesian statistics by the author, when they say "for the sake of simplicity, let's call it a wash and assume the odds are the same". Because the odds ratio is key…
Yeah, you're right, thank you. This is why you shouldn't do math past midnight, I guess :).
I might have a proof that this list is complete (I am very tired though and should be sleeping instead of doing this, so my apologies if I'm wrong): Because we can only get one extra by carrying, each digit of 2^(k - 1)…