31–40 of 66 posts
The premise is that people come on the show with, what they consider to be, a valuable artifact. They then have the chance to take it to 4 collectors who will offer them a sum of money for said artifact.
The aim is to come away with the best offer you can get - but you only get one shot with each collector, you can't go back to a previous one because all other offers have been lower.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the difference is that you're reading it as practical word problem, when the intent is to present a math problem. I first heard about this problem in a politically incorrect variation: a tribe chief is given the opportunity to choose a wife from a pool of n women, presented in a random order, one at a time. He can choose any woman, but can't choose a woman who he has already passed up. What's the strategy for…
How is that variation politically incorrect? Genuine question here. If anything, to me it seems culturally correct.
I'm going to be the dumb guy ranting here and say that I dislike this word problem since external knowledge of the world can change your strategy. I might be stopping too soon because the time cost of evaluating candidates is far too high compared to the work that needs to be done immediately. The sooner I get someone in, the sooner that work gets done, the less behind we all get, the less workload for the new secret…
Come to think of it, maybe I'd argue even stronger: when I was younger, I had a hard time understanding programming problems that were explained in terms of 'foo / bar' classes or function names. 'Applied' examples with cars and wheels made more sense, even if I could easily have come up with 'not every car has 4 wheels' counterarguments. Nowadays, I like foo / bar better, because they expose the problem directly, without an additional layer of real-world application, but only because I've gotten better at abstract reasoning.
The same strategy can be used in dating too. When you live in a major city and the dating options are boundless, there is always someone around the corner that is "perfect" or more perfect than the current person that you are dating. Next thing you know, you're in your late 30s and still single.
I always feel bad when I see these posts. I'm 26 and in a major city, but finding dates is a serious problem for me. My looks are only slightly below average (4/10) but my personality is probably the deal breaker.
(just kidding and don't take it personal - this one was too easy to pass up...)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I always feel bad when I see these posts. I'm 26 and in a major city, but finding dates is a serious problem for me. My looks are only slightly below average (4/10) but my personality is probably the deal breaker.
Cheer up, there must be below-average looking people with shitty personalities just like yourself out there who are just right for you! (just kidding and don't take it personal - this one was too easy to pass up...)
The same strategy can be used in dating too. When you live in a major city and the dating options are boundless, there is always someone around the corner that is "perfect" or more perfect than the current person that you are dating. Next thing you know, you're in your late 30s and still single.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Having been where you've been, may I suggest that the dealbreaker is that you're treating dating like a World of Warcraft inventory checklist? I wish someone had told me that when I was saying the same things.
FWIW, I do think there are similarities between dating and RPGs that I wish I had understood before * you can improve your character: confidence is important, if you feel ugly sometimes you can do stuff about it (i.e. go to gym). Ditto if you are a boring talker, or if you are a poor listener. * grind. If you are, like I was, a guy that has a couple hours on a weekend to meet a new possible date it's hard to find the…
These days I am just lazily sending out messages on OKCupid. And when I do go out to bars, I almost never approach.
So the "grind" reminder is totally fair.
The same strategy can be used in dating too. When you live in a major city and the dating options are boundless, there is always someone around the corner that is "perfect" or more perfect than the current person that you are dating. Next thing you know, you're in your late 30s and still single.
How do you arrive at n , your total pool of potential candidates?
There's a TV show in the UK that uses a spin on this - it's called 4 rooms. The premise is that people come on the show with, what they consider to be, a valuable artifact. They then have the chance to take it to 4 collectors who will offer them a sum of money for said artifact. The aim is to come away with the best offer you can get - but you only get one shot with each collector, you can't go back to a previous one…