How I would pack in one sentence the intuition for why ‘changing priors’ is ok: “Sometimes the number you wrote down as your prior is not your real prior, and looking at the data helps you sort that out.”
Esteemed Estimator
Karma: 14
As you said, limit new cards to 10-20 per day.
I think you might have misread that part, the post is advocating 10-20 review(!) cards per day and only 1-2 new cards
A perhaps unusual way in which I like to use Anki is to periodically remind me of thoughts that could come in handy in many situations, yet that have no particular “prompt” that should trigger them.
the image shows that you don’t have a distinct card front, so how do you judge whether to pass or fail the card?
Is it by how familiar the thought is, by how readily you think you would remember this when you need, by looking at the projected intervals and deciding which interval you want, or something else entirely?
I don’t like that you invited this person, and I think you shouldn’t have,
sure
and I think you should reverse that decision, and it’s on you if you ignore my advice and it goes poorly”
This seems a bit speculative to me. If OP didn’t believe that would the post have looked any different?
One idea is to “call out” the pressure you feel. “I’m having trouble saying anything because I’m worried what you will think of me.” This isn’t always a good idea, but it can often work fairly well. Someone who is caving to incentives isn’t very likely to say something like that, so it provides some evidence that you’re being genuine.
If it provides evidence that I’m being genuine, someone who isn’t being genuine would use this strategy and say the same thing. The other person knows this, so “calling out” shouldn’t provide evidence that I’m being genuine. If a person who isn’t being genuine wouldn’t use this strategy in the first place because it has a net effect of undermining their credibility, then I also shouldn’t be using this strategy since it has a net effect of undermining my credibility.
In practice this isn’t always correct (maybe people who are being genuine are a bit more likely to worry about incentives) but this consideration has a similar shutting down effect on me because we are just pushing the incentive problem to a different layer.
~64.5% of respondents to the 2024 survey claimed to have read “about 50%” or more of the sequences. ~55.2% claim “about 75%” or more.