Agreed. This was brilliant. Even just one more would be awesome
@danielm51612 жыл бұрын
Yes I will glady tune in every week
@evitago2 жыл бұрын
Great video! Thanks for hosting and publishing! You should have made the title "David Deutsch CRUSHES Robin Hanson in debate" or "David Deutsch FLUSTERED by Robin Hanson's LOGIC" for maximum views ^_^
@allthatyousee188 ай бұрын
Robin Hanson said that he made so many independent points that the probability of at least one being true was very high. Deutsch replied that this was a bad explanation.
@TheBswan2 жыл бұрын
Had professor Hanson for undergraduate law and economics. The breadth of his knowledge is crazy.
@oceanquigley2 жыл бұрын
Two of my favorite thinkers engaging with each other. Fantastic.
@danielvarga_p Жыл бұрын
ikr - i know right
@user-kc4lt2eg6u2 жыл бұрын
Very well mediated
@user-kc4lt2eg6u2 жыл бұрын
(Not sarcasm)
@dannn1852 жыл бұрын
@@user-kc4lt2eg6u Thank you. I mean to speak more clearly in future. I brought questions, but they didn't need them.
@nbme-answers2 жыл бұрын
@@dannn185 Some people are so productive in their ideas that interjection and interview by a moderator diminishes the conversation. You did a great job letting them “hash it out” with only infrequent and brief clarification. Bravo.
@benjamindees4 ай бұрын
Great discussion. No clear winner. It's a shame it doesn't have more views.
@ChuckSilva2 жыл бұрын
David is awesome! I am perpetually on the outlook for new material-gr8!
@danielnofal2 жыл бұрын
Fantastic conversation. I love the background elements table that David uses.
@daltonlight2884 Жыл бұрын
Probability (and stochastic models) are most problematic when the values of their underlying assumptions (historical base rates) are subject to change. These concepts are useful when their predictions embody some explanatory model about the way the world really is. This knowledge is usually implicit in statistical models since the numbers do not always carry units with them, especially when expressed in pure probabilistic terms. In other words, probability is effective because it captures a possibility space and one of those possibilities could be the actual case (reality). For a stochastic model to continuously make successful predictions, the system it models must be static (closed). The primary reason stochastic predictions fail is when the model attempts to predict dynamic (open) systems in which new knowledge (new explanatory assumptions) can be created that differ from or are not captured by the base assumptions of the model. This amounts to predicting what new knowledge will be created... a hopelessly impossible task.
@cueva_mc Жыл бұрын
Isnt he saying that probability is not explanatory knowledge?
@doriyoavdori2 жыл бұрын
David the undisputed champ won the debate with every round KO... and seriously that's great to hear David on specific topic's predictions and what can we predict with our best explanations. Hanson is a perfect debater for this thanks a lot Daniel!
@GuillermoValleCosmos2 жыл бұрын
Yes I agree. They matched really well! I don't think there's a clear winner myself:>
@danielm51612 жыл бұрын
These guys are more or less on the same page really
@MrTubber442 жыл бұрын
Most fascinating! Appreciate cha!
@thesilvervigilante2 жыл бұрын
I can't believe the balls on this guy treating the father of quantum Computing like this.
@patmoran53392 күн бұрын
Starting around minute 31 is a kernel of the current pessimistic view that human knowledge should have a stop is exposed by Deutsch. What happens in the future depends on what we think and do. We need to increase the speed of problem-solving.
Robin simply doesn't understand David's epistemology, but thanks for the content!
@a.fleischbender76812 жыл бұрын
Robin's argument is that you can't condition on information you don't have. It doesn't matter whether you have the "right" probability distribution or not. The only thing that matters is what forecast model you can create given the information you have at the time (i.e. your Baysian prior). David argument is bascially "your probablity distribution is wrong. So don't use it for forecasting". And Robin says "well we don't have the correct distribution, but what we have is better than random chance, so we should use it what we have until we learn more".
@SuperGnarley2 жыл бұрын
@@a.fleischbender7681 No, David did not argue that
@artiexus3 ай бұрын
@@SuperGnarley Then what did he argue?
@danielvarga_p Жыл бұрын
Hello really nice one thank you!
@davidhoracek67582 жыл бұрын
Lots of people can sound smart, but can you have an engaging conversation with David Deutsch and continue to sound smart? I think Robin Hanson did it. How many other human beings could?
@gregb56832 жыл бұрын
David is a very patient man.
@cueva_mc Жыл бұрын
Is the conclusion that stochastic models and inductive reasoning are useful but they are wrong as they are not accurate explanations of reality?
@johnwill84672 жыл бұрын
How does David predict what he might have for dinner tomorrow night?
2 жыл бұрын
Hanson's constant snide interruptions made this a less helpful conversation than it could have been.
@jeremywvarietyofviewpoints31042 жыл бұрын
The fun thing about predictions is that they are often wrong.
@justcurious-tl8tsАй бұрын
Robin is quite talented and is one of the better economists but he comes across as too defensive in this conversation and does not seem to understand the clear flaws in some of his arguments that David repeatedly tries to communicate in this conversation. Worth a watch nevertheless.
@ptaylor33042 жыл бұрын
Why does Robin get so flustered. Seems to derail the convo a little.
@gregb56832 жыл бұрын
Robin has a wonderful mind. He is just debating with one of the most amazing minds of our time. He didn’t need to do so.
@podge73562 жыл бұрын
Not very familiar with Robin before this but I actually think he is a very good conversationalist. When he gets flustered (which I agree seems like a lot of the time 😂) he still responds in a good-natured way, while bringing a lot of energy and interesting ideas. Also, it could be that he seemed more exasperated than he was because he is so expressive, lots of hand gestures and stuff
@ptaylor33042 жыл бұрын
@@podge7356 it was a good conversation and good natured yes. It just felt like he was a little more invested in being right than openly exploring the ideas (at those flustered points).
@podge73562 жыл бұрын
@@ptaylor3304 agreed! Happens to the best of us
@ptaylor33042 жыл бұрын
@@podge7356 indeed
@0MoTheG2 жыл бұрын
If you have nothing to go on, then don't make a prediction. Plenty trends come to an end or are only superficial. Will the population of earth decline because it's women become educated and career oriented?
@mistycloud44552 жыл бұрын
A.G.I Will be man's last invention
@patmoran53395 ай бұрын
No, it won't. It will be the finest expression of the fact that humans are creative universal explainers. We are not yet anywhere near the breakthrough. We are stuck in the philosophy of man as machine.