In Bayesian statistics that’s called credence. Weird that they felt the need to invent a new term.
replyJeeves pretended to understand. Is there data showing Jev's actually calibrated?
replyI like it. It is short and distinct which is a good fit for a primitive. It describes its fundamental meaning and draws a connotation with Boolean.
replyThe whole "no hallucinations" premise is based on that.
replyLike, yeah, you don't hallucinate, but only because you force the user to decide in the end.
force the user to decide in the end
replyAnd that's...bad?
Not entirely.
replyI think, it's a bit much to call this "no hallucinations".
Technically true, but in practice you could still choose the wrong result or the probabilities can be off.
That seems like the only possible way to eliminate hallucination, short of a model that is never wrong.
replyWait til you hear about how digital circuits work at die level
replyBernoulli
replyIf you want to get super pedantic about what’s happening in a transistor every digital Boolean is actually this
replyNot quite.. that boolean is about whether the voltage exceeds some threshold. It's not about how close the voltage is to the circuit's maximum possible threshold, or how much it exceeds the threshold.
replyIn an analog circuit, maybe.