<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Bayesian truth serum</title>
	<atom:link href="http://neurodudes.com/2009/12/08/bayesian-truth-serum/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://neurodudes.com/2009/12/08/bayesian-truth-serum/</link>
	<description>at the intersection of neuroscience and AI.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 20 Dec 2011 22:17:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alex Golubev</title>
		<link>http://neurodudes.com/2009/12/08/bayesian-truth-serum/comment-page-1/#comment-897016</link>
		<dc:creator>Alex Golubev</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Dec 2009 05:25:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://neurodudes.com/?p=836#comment-897016</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m glad to see at least a few other e-souls recognize BTS.  Internet has diminished distribution costs to 0, so the new constraint is filtering for quality of opinion and experts.  I think that BTS can beat consensus, google, and even Last.fm type algorithms.  let me know what you guys think about my ideas of Truthocracy:
http://emergentfool.com/2009/11/18/truthocracy-part-ii-discovering-truth-and-experts/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m glad to see at least a few other e-souls recognize BTS.  Internet has diminished distribution costs to 0, so the new constraint is filtering for quality of opinion and experts.  I think that BTS can beat consensus, google, and even Last.fm type algorithms.  let me know what you guys think about my ideas of Truthocracy:<br />
<a href="http://emergentfool.com/2009/11/18/truthocracy-part-ii-discovering-truth-and-experts/" rel="nofollow">http://emergentfool.com/2009/11/18/truthocracy-part-ii-discovering-truth-and-experts/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: catalina</title>
		<link>http://neurodudes.com/2009/12/08/bayesian-truth-serum/comment-page-1/#comment-896906</link>
		<dc:creator>catalina</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Dec 2009 11:55:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://neurodudes.com/?p=836#comment-896906</guid>
		<description>in the case we assume that a common answer is derived from the preference of a popular individual, which method would be valid to prove the honest response of a person&#039;s real preference? also assuming that the subject has the capacity of choice, aware that the most common answer is that which tends to be preferred by the most popular individual. does this study accept the inability of many to achieve own regalia, or does it present subjects who acknowledge their own power to choose based on personal preference?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>in the case we assume that a common answer is derived from the preference of a popular individual, which method would be valid to prove the honest response of a person&#8217;s real preference? also assuming that the subject has the capacity of choice, aware that the most common answer is that which tends to be preferred by the most popular individual. does this study accept the inability of many to achieve own regalia, or does it present subjects who acknowledge their own power to choose based on personal preference?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bayle</title>
		<link>http://neurodudes.com/2009/12/08/bayesian-truth-serum/comment-page-1/#comment-896898</link>
		<dc:creator>Bayle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Dec 2009 09:57:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://neurodudes.com/?p=836#comment-896898</guid>
		<description>i cross-posted this here and elsewhere -- just noting that so that it is clear that neither site stole from the other</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i cross-posted this here and elsewhere &#8212; just noting that so that it is clear that neither site stole from the other</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

