Comment

Comment by lordnacho

Well it would make sense if that were the case.

You have some system that tried to balance bias, variance, and utility. Sometimes that best way to do that is to have some bias. The classic example of this is you may jump when you see something that looks like a predator, but then turns out not to be. The cost of being wrong (see nothing when predator, see predator when nothing) means it's optimal to sometimes see danger that isn't there.

parent lordnacho 10 years ago

Discussion

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton