Every time a Bayesian attacks fallacies of frequentism, I agree with their points. But that does not necessarily imply Bayesian is 'better' than frequentist method and should replace it. Bayesians have their own problems, and it cannot be solved by blaming frequentists. I really like Bayesian ideas and their methods... but I hate some of Bayesians boasting their results too much - "Frequentists are all wrong, while Bayesian methods are perfect" is clearly an overstatement.
Friday, January 13, 2012
http://arxiv.org/pdf/
Every time a Bayesian attacks fallacies of frequentism, I agree with their points. But that does not necessarily imply Bayesian is 'better' than frequentist method and should replace it. Bayesians have their own problems, and it cannot be solved by blaming frequentists. I really like Bayesian ideas and their methods... but I hate some of Bayesians boasting their results too much - "Frequentists are all wrong, while Bayesian methods are perfect" is clearly an overstatement.
Every time a Bayesian attacks fallacies of frequentism, I agree with their points. But that does not necessarily imply Bayesian is 'better' than frequentist method and should replace it. Bayesians have their own problems, and it cannot be solved by blaming frequentists. I really like Bayesian ideas and their methods... but I hate some of Bayesians boasting their results too much - "Frequentists are all wrong, while Bayesian methods are perfect" is clearly an overstatement.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)