Thanks a Lot for this. Also I am VAE right now and struggling with Bayesian Probability and Stats. In general too the Bayesian Concepts are tough to understand in Research papers. If anyone has anything on Bayesian Inference it will be very nice
Going to guess you have deontic views, and not consequentialist. Therefore, making a guess if someone loses their job or not is against your beliefs. Holding my thumbs. Edit: Phew! So for a deontologist the work required to arrive at a decision to terminate a contract with these chemical tests is a lot more costly than sticking to your guns and simply getting to know the person. For a consequentialist this takes a lot less work because they need less proof, so they choose the non-personal approach. This is basically what is wrong with society; there is information assymmetry because in the decision making process deontic logic is inclusive and consequentialist logic is exclusive. If we try to take an average then no one is happy and there is no logical basis for decision.
Steve Brunton spreading the good word of Bayes and saving us engineering folk. Plenty thanks sir!
Steve is working out, smart and handsome
Thanks a Lot for this. Also I am VAE right now and struggling with Bayesian Probability and Stats. In general too the Bayesian Concepts are tough to understand in Research papers. If anyone has anything on Bayesian Inference it will be very nice
Your audience reaches a lot of countries. I'm watching from Pakistan.
excellent
thank your sir
wow your comment is 1 month old, and video came 4 days ago... what is the probability of that?
@@makavelilcf zero i think 😅
Lol what an example to show how to use baye’s theorem. That must’ve been an interesting lecture for the people in 564 🌳
Going to guess you have deontic views, and not consequentialist. Therefore, making a guess if someone loses their job or not is against your beliefs. Holding my thumbs.
Edit: Phew!
So for a deontologist the work required to arrive at a decision to terminate a contract with these chemical tests is a lot more costly than sticking to your guns and simply getting to know the person. For a consequentialist this takes a lot less work because they need less proof, so they choose the non-personal approach. This is basically what is wrong with society; there is information assymmetry because in the decision making process deontic logic is inclusive and consequentialist logic is exclusive. If we try to take an average then no one is happy and there is no logical basis for decision.