Mikhail and Hodj's Political Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,673
18,384
Mikhail Bakunin_sl said:
Araysar, here's the trick to understanding/accepting the monty hall problem:

Imagine playing it with 100 doors instead of just 3. You pick from 1 of 100 doors (99 goats, 1 car). The host then reveals 98 of those. If you picked the car at the start, the other door will be a goat. If you picked one of the 99 goats, the other door will be a car. You'd always switch, right? Well why? Because your odds of picking the right door out of 100 were really low. Well your odds are still less than 50% when there are only 3 doors (it's 1/3). That's why switching doors isn't an even gamble even though there are only two doors left at the end.
Click to expand...
Uh oh. Mikhail done fucked up now.
 
Araysar

Loser Araysar

Log Wizard
<Gold Donor>
84,914
171,903
hodj_sl said:
A more interesting question is what is the probability of getting heads or tails 100 times in a row. The answer to that question is 7.889*10^(-31).

So basically, that's a .0000000000000000000000000000007889..... chance.

I love big tiny numbers. Also scientific notation.
Click to expand...
Wrong, the chance is 50/50 because the construct of the sequence of flips is completely arbitrary and artificial.

Lets say you and your coworker flip a coin each day to see who goes to get lunch. And sometimes after work you go play pool and you flip a coin in the beginning to see who gets to break the table.

Which of those flips are part of sequence and which arent?

Statistics and probability is a pseudoscience
 
Araysar

Loser Araysar

Log Wizard
<Gold Donor>
84,914
171,903
Mikhail Bakunin_sl said:
Araysar, here's the trick to understanding/accepting the monty hall problem:

Imagine playing it with 100 doors instead of just 3. You pick from 1 of 100 doors (99 goats, 1 car). The host then reveals 98 of those. If you picked the car at the start, the other door will be a goat. If you picked one of the 99 goats, the other door will be a car. You'd always switch, right? Well why? Because your odds of picking the right door out of 100 were really low. Well your odds are still less than 50% when there are only 3 doors (it's 1/3). That's why switching doors isn't an even gamble even though there are only two doors left at the end.
Click to expand...
The final decision is choosing 1 door out of 2. i.e. a 50/50 choice.
 
khalid

khalid

Unelected Mod
14,071
6,775
TheBeagle_sl said:
Everyone that thinks economics is a real science, raise their hands.
Click to expand...
Anything that isn't pure mathematics or completely applied mathematics (computer science) is not science and should be completely discarded. This view has nothing to do with it allowing me to look down on everyone else.

I hereby dismiss everything from all sciences softer than that.
 
M

Mikhail Bakunin_sl

shitlord
2,199
1
Araysar_sl said:
The final decision is choosing 1 door out of 2. i.e. a 50/50 choice.
Click to expand...
Right but because there were 100 doors at the start, it's extremely unlikely that the first door you chose is right. You still have that knowledge when the second choice comes around. There are two doors, but they don't have equal odds.
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,673
18,384
khalid_sl said:
Anything that isn't pure mathematics or completely applied mathematics (computer science) is not science and should be completely discarded. This view has nothing to do with it allowing me to look down on everyone else.

I hereby dismiss everything from all sciences softer than that.
Click to expand...
Its okay, Khalid, we all know this is how you goddamn math majors really feel deep down inside. You can let it all out here.

(but seriously, I have a ridiculous amount of respect for math majors. I see math as a means to an end more than an end unto itself, but that's only possible because people like you saw math as a means unto itself first)

Araysar_sl said:
Wrong, the chance is 50/50 because the construct of the sequence of flips is completely arbitrary and artificial.
Click to expand...
rrr_img_47709.jpg
 
khalid

khalid

Unelected Mod
14,071
6,775
Anyway, as far as economics being a science, of course it can be. You can base it on statistics. Make some assumptions, come up with some conclusions and test those conclusions with gathered data. Or you can make shit up. Which some economists do.

It seems that it would be very convenient for Marxists if all of economics was completely unfalsifiable and untestable. That would mean we would have to take their word on everything and nothing they said could be disproved in any real way. Unfortunately, that isn't the case.
 
Araysar

Loser Araysar

Log Wizard
<Gold Donor>
84,914
171,903
Mikhail Bakunin_sl said:
Right but because there were 100 doors at the start, it's extremely unlikely that the first door you chose is right. You still have that knowledge when the second choice comes around. There are two doors, but they don't have equal odds.
Click to expand...
Right but that doesnt matter because the ultimate final choice is choosing 1 out of 2 doors, i.e. a 50/50 choice
 
Izo

Izo

Tranny Chaser
20,100
25,204
So, Araysar you're dismissing a posteriori odds in favor of the a priori, by saying that Bayes theorem is a pseudo science? Where were you when I had to suffer this in class, Araysar. WHERE WERE YOU?!?!?!?!

Oh, hodj:
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,673
18,384
I dunno why, but I really really want to watch Araysar and Mikhail argue over whether the chance of picking the right door is 1/3 or 2/3 or 1/2 or not.

This seems like it couldt be tremendously entertaining for my Thursday night.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.