RE: OK, understood, but still 1 *huge* flaw

in reply to OK, understood, but still 1 *huge* flaw
in thread Spooky math problem

Whoa. What tilly is claiming is that we have a "better than 50% chance" of getting it right. The degree to which it's "better" can be *mind-bogglingly miniscule* (we're talking continuous quantities here) so I don't think we're warranted in exporting any claims about the actual probabilities from what a program reports.

Philosophy can be made out of anything. Or less -- Jerry A. Fodor

Comment on RE: OK, understood, but still 1 huge flaw

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
RE: RE: OK, understood, but still 1 huge flaw by Fastolfe (Vicar) on Nov 01, 2000 at 23:57 UTC
I don't care what the theory is. I may not understand it, in which case my changes to the code are non-sensical, but they basically boil down to this: `$num1 = rand(1000); $num2 = rand(1000); # pretend $num2 != $num1 $guess = rand($num1 * 2);` [download] Are we asserting that `$num2 > $guess` more than 50% of the time?	[reply] [d/l] [select]

In Section Meditations