Thanks for the feedback, I’m really happy to hear that you already have uses for it!
You’re right about needing examples; I’m thinking I’ll add a tutorial that walks someone completely unfamiliar with Bayes’ theorem through what it means and how it works, with lots of examples. That will take a while to design and write though.
I’m curious to know if other people felt the same way “How to use” part. I’m reluctant to make it more attention grabbing, because I want it to feel unobtrusive. My current thinking is that the main interface will catch the user’s attention first, and if that’s not clear they’ll look at the wall of text to the right.
Instead of a wizard, I was thinking of adding a feature that explains what a specific component means when the user is hovering over it. Does that seem like it would address the issue adequately? I don’t like wizards because I feel like they get in the way, but maybe that’s an unusual preference.
Bayes’ theorem already has a tutorial! However, I think that more common examples than there will improve the page.
For example, “do I really have certain illness” isn’t as resonating as “does someone offend me intentionally”, though the latter is a bit too emotional. I think that “is certain letter fraud” would make a good example—for instance, it contains different pieces of evidence.
Thanks for the feedback, I’m really happy to hear that you already have uses for it!
You’re right about needing examples; I’m thinking I’ll add a tutorial that walks someone completely unfamiliar with Bayes’ theorem through what it means and how it works, with lots of examples. That will take a while to design and write though.
I’m curious to know if other people felt the same way “How to use” part. I’m reluctant to make it more attention grabbing, because I want it to feel unobtrusive. My current thinking is that the main interface will catch the user’s attention first, and if that’s not clear they’ll look at the wall of text to the right.
Instead of a wizard, I was thinking of adding a feature that explains what a specific component means when the user is hovering over it. Does that seem like it would address the issue adequately? I don’t like wizards because I feel like they get in the way, but maybe that’s an unusual preference.
Bayes’ theorem already has a tutorial! However, I think that more common examples than there will improve the page.
For example, “do I really have certain illness” isn’t as resonating as “does someone offend me intentionally”, though the latter is a bit too emotional. I think that “is certain letter fraud” would make a good example—for instance, it contains different pieces of evidence.