Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[IcyTea31]

'Tis a silly place

It's only a model

Oh, not this conspiracy theory again.

[ChairmanPoo]

Tis only a model and we are all Pathos sockpuppets

[McTraveller]

http://store.steampowered.com/app/710610/Dont_Sink/

Seriously people. Don't do dumb things with your foИts.

EDIT: 

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Must depend on your rendering engine. Check out various screenshots of the game in the link.  For some reason they have reversed the n.  So that last word above is 'fonts' but with a glyph that is a capital N but with the diagonal going up and to the right, instead of down and to the right.

[Maximum Spin]

foits?

[pikachu17]

How in the Monty Haul Problem is switching supposed to give a 66.7% chance of success? At that point, there is one car and one goat, so either way, it is a fifty-fifty chance.
Assuming no other unstated factors, obviously, and that the host would have no idea which is better, and always allows the switch.

[TamerVirus]

A player who stays with the initial choice wins in only one out of three of these equally likely possibilities, while a player who switches wins in two out of three. An intuitive explanation is that, if the contestant initially picks a goat (2 of 3 doors), the contestant will win the car by switching because the other goat can no longer be picked, whereas if the contestant initially picks the car (1 of 3 doors), the contestant will not win the car by switching (Carlton 2005, concluding remarks). The fact that the host subsequently reveals a goat in one of the unchosen doors changes nothing about the initial probability.

[JoshuaFH]

I'm with pikachu on this one, that just sounds like logical fuckery.

[TamerVirus]

Mythbusters confirmed it
Computer simulation confirmed it
People way smarter than any of us have confirmed it.
Switching is proven to be objectively better

[ChairmanPoo]

Its not because of your original choice but because of the dealer's choice. The dealer knows which doors are empty and always picks an empty one.

Your original door had 33% odds of being wrong. AKA there's a 66% chance that the prize is behind one of the dealer's doors. By clearing an empty door, for practical purposes you're choosing between opening two doors OR only one door (Again: the dealer KNOWS which doors are empty), because there is a 66% chance that the prize is behind one of the other doors, and if it is, the dealer has already told you behind which door it is not.

Mythbusters confirmed it
Computer simulation confirmed it
People way smarter than any of us have confirmed it.
Switching is proven to be objectively better

I feel its important to understand the "why" rather than take it as a dogma of faith. You dont need a simulation or a mythbusters tv show to prove this. Just consider it slowly and dont let your brain stunlock you into the "obvious" unmeditated answer

How in the Monty Haul Problem is switching supposed to give a 66.7% chance of success? At that point, there is one car and one goat, so either way, it is a fifty-fifty chance.
Assuming no other unstated factors, obviously, and that the host would have no idea which is better, and always allows the switch.

the host knows, because he never shows you the car and always shows you the goat. he just shows you where is a goat. So you're choosing between the 33% chance of your door having a car or the 66% chance of the other two doors having the car, with the addenum that, if its behind the other two doors, you already know which door isnt it. So you're beinh offered the opportunity to choose "two" doors instead of one

[Frumple]

Guy riding a something-propelled bicycle down the street. The something was trailing the bike by a good bike length behind, on its own set of wheels and attached to the bike. Couldn't tell what it was other than some sort of engine, maybe weed-eater-ish size or thereabouts. Sounded gas propelled but other than being hella' questionably road legal I'unno.

... which I guess actually makes it not a bicycle, just one of the more odd looking four-wheeled devices I've seen in a while. Faintly bizarre regardless.

[NJW2000]

Think of it as trial by fire.

[pikachu17]

Replying to Chairman Poo without quoting.
But how? It should have 50-50 probability, since there is now one car, and one goat. That there used to be a second goat means nothing, as it doesn't make it not a one out of two choice now.
If I roll a natural twenty, my chances of rolling a second natural twenty is one in twenty, since past events don't change future probability, in these cases.

EDIT:I'm sorry, chairman poo. I don't understand your logic.
Of the two remaining doors, one is a car, and one is a goat. You already chose one, but you can switch to the other. Either your original door(OD) the one with the car, and the switched door(SD) is.
So the possibilities are:
OD has car, and SD has the goat.
Or,
SD has the car, and OD has the goat.
That means you have a 50% chance. The third goat means nothing to the current choice.

[TamerVirus]

There were originally 3 doors, one with the winning car. 33% chance to win.
Eliminating one door doesn't change the fact that you originally choose from 3 doors with a 33% chance to win

[pikachu17]

But this isn't the original choice, this is a choice between two doors.
Please note the possibilies of each door being the one with car. Either door one, or door two has the car. Door three is not a possible container of the car.

[Felissan]

It isn't a symmetrical situation because of the stuff that happened before. Make a graph of all the possible situations, it might help.