Game Theory 101 (#71): Bayes' Rule 

That is definitely the form of Bayes’ rule that I use much more often! In different contexts though, I think using the form that William presented would make more sense. For instance, in the cancer screening, it might be more difficult to determine or estimate the chances of both having cancer and getting a positive test result right off the bat. Rather, that value can be calculated from the sensitivity (probability of a positive result if someone does have cancer) and specificity (probability of negative result if someone doesn’t have cancer) of the test, which would probably be provided as background information from the makers or marketers of the test.

Nope, there isn't any text for the second half of the course. I've thought about writing it, but there just isn't a large enough market to justify the time expense for me.

i Know I am getting 6/10, even on calculator

Not yet produced. Will probably pick back up on it during the summer.

I was't just gonna say this. It's very saddening for students that are just trying to focus on studying and then come across such an example and thinking back on losing lost ones.

Yeah I think it might have been better/less morbid to use screening for another less serious/easily curable condition. Though to be fair, screening for serious conditions like cancer is one of the biggest and most important applications of this type of reasoning. I also think that if more people understand the logic, it can help them (and their loved ones) make more informed decisions.

Is "you have x% chance of NOT having cancer" any better?

William Spaniel only if x =100

i agree, this is bad example chosen

It is just an example, and a really common one to illustrate Bayes Rule. You guys couldn't go Med. School then I guess. Most examples there are bad haha

I was thinking about that through the whole video