Or call them skypes. Also not in use.

To what degree, might I ask, do you hold "uncertainty" itself in tension between Bayesian ideals and heuristics?

I feel like all they would learn is that the left and right hemispheres get on each other's nerves, except there are no nerves. All the embodied metaphors fall apart, and the aliens learn absolutely nothing.

Another angle is to qualify whether it is presumed that Sen's conception of "Positional Objectivity" is formally synthesizeable to Nagel's "View from nowhere" Objectivity. And if not, what could be a reasonable yet formalizable treatment of the disconnect?

Personally, I hold moderate objection to the truth value available wherever reasoning under uncertainty presumes that "uncertainty" to be proportional to "100% certainty" despite an indifferentiable sample space, echoing Gigerenzer.

Is there a good summary of the points of contention here? And are these points exclusive to Bayesian framing or also applicable to Frequentist?

He seems more into Einstein than Bohr!

Thereby proving inflation was the real villain.

Only one mystery remains. Is Janus' cat dead, alive and/or The Cat Beyond Time and Space?

I must answer "Nu"

I have been having extensive conversations with Claude3 Opus, and while I am clearly leading him by the nose, what he is able to pick up on, extrapolate, and occasionally infer is pretty nuts.

I might share a few samples on bsky soon, but the range and depth is just wild.

In reference to the book, obviously. I have less than wiki-level knowledge of his research more generally as I have just recently been introduced to him myself.

I am currently working my way through some of the more "technical details" (not that technical) to be sure I understand the tradeoffs.

To my first approximation confirmation biases, it's fantastic! 🤓

Are you familiar with Igor Douven's The Art of Abduction, and if so, is this question along a similar vector?