Well, yes, it’s not a perfect summary. I have no idea why they’d say Popper was working on Bayesianism—unless maybe “the problem” in that clause was the problem of induction, and something got lost in an edit.
But sometimes nitpicks aren’t that important. Like, for example, it’s spelled Vitanyi. But this isn’t really a crushing refutation of your post (though it is a very convenient illustration). You shouldn’t sweat this too much, because their textbook really is worth reading about algorithmic information theory.
Well, yes, it’s not a perfect summary. I have no idea why they’d say Popper was working on Bayesianism—unless maybe “the problem” in that clause was the problem of induction, and something got lost in an edit.
But sometimes nitpicks aren’t that important. Like, for example, it’s spelled Vitanyi. But this isn’t really a crushing refutation of your post (though it is a very convenient illustration). You shouldn’t sweat this too much, because their textbook really is worth reading about algorithmic information theory.