

Bayesian Statistics and What Nate Silver Gets Wrong - equark
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/books/2013/01/what-nate-silver-gets-wrong.html

======
jfasi
This article does raise interesting points, and Nate Silver does stretch the
power of Bayesian statistics a little bit. However, the crux of his argument
for Bayesian statistics is that it provides a process by which we can approach
truth asymptotically.

The beautiful thing about bayesian probability is that the first experiments
conditional probability is the next experiment's bayesian prior. We
acknowledge the epistemological fact that our initial understanding of the
world is flawed, and correct it from there.

