21–30 of 331 posts
I could not grasp the probability maths (still shit at it, sorry Ms Von Savant) but I could write a program to experimentally demonstrate it, so I did.
In QBasic. Because that's what we had and we were happy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You need to know that the car is randomly placed You don't need to know this. > and that the host always has to show you an empty (ok, goat) door before offering you to switch You know this through the line, "Then, the host, who is well-aware of what’s going on behind the scenes." If you can't understand that a game show host won't spoil the game they're hosting, that's on you and a good opportunity to pick up comm…
It might be that he only does the reveal-and-switch offer if your original pick was the car.
Because he did it this time?
Amazed this nitpicking is still going on; it's illustrative.
Am I the only person who wonders how "Marilyn Vos Savant" also happens to be the smartest person? If you didn't notice, "Savant" means smart. So is it just a coincidence? Karma? The pressure of carrying such a name drove her to smartness?
Am I the only person who wonders how "Marilyn Vos Savant" also happens to be the smartest person? If you didn't notice, "Savant" means smart. So is it just a coincidence? Karma? The pressure of carrying such a name drove her to smartness?
Am I the only person who wonders how "Marilyn Vos Savant" also happens to be the smartest person? If you didn't notice, "Savant" means smart. So is it just a coincidence? Karma? The pressure of carrying such a name drove her to smartness?
Per Wikipedia: Marilyn vos Savant was born Marilyn Mach on August 11, 1946, in St. Louis, Missouri, to parents Joseph Mach and Marina vos Savant. ... so only 50% coincidence.
Turns out, instead, she's the G.O.A.T.
This is something I remember from the time. I could not grasp the probability maths (still shit at it, sorry Ms Von Savant) but I could write a program to experimentally demonstrate it, so I did. In QBasic. Because that's what we had and we were happy.
The way the problem works started coming together in my head as I coded it. The code’s structure reflected the problem’s structure. I realized I previously misunderstood something about the problem statement. Later, I read someone saying many mathematicians got this problem wrong because of how it’s worded.
So, it may be challenging, not because probability was challenging, but because it was unclearly specified. That’s the cause of many software errors, too.
My character hinges on that understanding now.