When Is Cheryl's Birthday? • Hacker News Board

Re: When Is Cheryl's Birthday?

#111

Post by baddox » Sat, Apr 25, 2015, 6:21 PM UTC

zhte415 wrote: post #71

baddox wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you think that confusion over the English description is more to blame than the difficulties many people face with logic puzzles?

I do not make a comparison to 'difficulties many people face with logic problems' and did not make an assertion that many people face difficulties with logic puzzles. Getting back to the article: the problem is worded so badly it should be sent back to the author to more coherently express what they think. Specifications, etc...

I simply disagree that the problem is worded badly. I thought it was extremely precise and clear.

Re: When Is Cheryl's Birthday?

#112

Post by baddox » Sat, Apr 25, 2015, 6:24 PM UTC

chongli wrote: post #80

baddox wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's very simple in the context of logic puzzles. Similarly, the melody of "Ode to Joy" is very simple to play on the piano. That's not to say that there aren't at least 1,200 people unable to play it on the piano. But it is one of the simplest recognizable melodies to play on the piano, and is likely playable by the vast majority of people with a few months of piano lessons.

The hard part is not the logic, it's actually figuring out that this is a logic puzzle that needs to be solved by deduction and not a bunch of nonsense with terrible grammar. To borrow your Ode To Joy example, it's like trying to learn to play the piece after the sheet music had been torn and tattered, burned and stained with coffee. Sure, the music is simple once you get past all of the garbage in your way. The orig…

> The hard part is not the logic, it's actually figuring out that this is a logic puzzle that needs to be solved by deduction and not a bunch of nonsense with terrible grammar.

I am seeing this claim a lot, but I do not understand it. Why would readers assume that a riddle is a bunch of nonsense, rather than something with an objective answer?

> To borrow your Ode To Joy example, it's like trying to learn to play the piece after the sheet music had been torn and tattered, burned and stained with coffee.

I don't see the analogy, because I had no trouble understanding the wording of the puzzle. I thought it was extremely clear and precise. To use your analogy, I feel like I'm looking at a pristine professionally-notated piece of sheet music while everyone else is saying it's torn and tattered.

Re: When Is Cheryl's Birthday?

#113

Post by baddox » Sat, Apr 25, 2015, 6:28 PM UTC

andrewprock wrote: post #97

baddox wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me, all those things are very readily inferred from the fact that the problem is being posed as a logic puzzle.

Logic puzzles where one must assume so much are not about pure logic. They are "logic" puzzles. If you aren't made aware of the assumptions that were made in building the puzzle, the solution you arrive at may not match the "logical" one. Because of this, solutions are often not logical.

Is it really such a big leap to assume that fictional people in a logic puzzle or riddle are telling the truth? I don't think so. To me, it's very clear that the names of the people are chosen arbitrarily (with first letters corresponding to the first letters of the alphabet) and that the things they are saying are simply a way to convey the logical constraints to the reader. It's very obvious to me that the fictional people, their names, and the fact that they are speaking aren't actually relevant to the logic puzzle.

Re: When Is Cheryl's Birthday?

#114

Post by sukilot » Sat, Apr 25, 2015, 6:42 PM UTC

chongli wrote: post #80

baddox wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's very simple in the context of logic puzzles. Similarly, the melody of "Ode to Joy" is very simple to play on the piano. That's not to say that there aren't at least 1,200 people unable to play it on the piano. But it is one of the simplest recognizable melodies to play on the piano, and is likely playable by the vast majority of people with a few months of piano lessons.

The hard part is not the logic, it's actually figuring out that this is a logic puzzle that needs to be solved by deduction and not a bunch of nonsense with terrible grammar. To borrow your Ode To Joy example, it's like trying to learn to play the piece after the sheet music had been torn and tattered, burned and stained with coffee. Sure, the music is simple once you get past all of the garbage in your way. The orig…

Please don't confuse a different country's dialect of English with "terrible grammar"

Re: When Is Cheryl's Birthday?

#115

Post by sukilot » Sat, Apr 25, 2015, 6:44 PM UTC

baddox wrote: post #112

chongli wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The hard part is not the logic, it's actually figuring out that this is a logic puzzle that needs to be solved by deduction and not a bunch of nonsense with terrible grammar. To borrow your Ode To Joy example, it's like trying to learn to play the piece after the sheet music had been torn and tattered, burned and stained with coffee. Sure, the music is simple once you get past all of the garbage in your way. The orig…

> The hard part is not the logic, it's actually figuring out that this is a logic puzzle that needs to be solved by deduction and not a bunch of nonsense with terrible grammar. I am seeing this claim a lot, but I do not understand it. Why would readers assume that a riddle is a bunch of nonsense, rather than something with an objective answer? > To borrow your Ode To Joy example, it's like trying to learn to play the…

If you learned to play piano in a different notation, Western clef note sheet music would be cryptic. Not everyone has learned the same language of expressing precise concepts.

Re: When Is Cheryl's Birthday?

#116

Post by sukilot » Sat, Apr 25, 2015, 6:50 PM UTC

Jach wrote: post #94

pdpi wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> under the order of operations implied by e.g. the vector space axioms What, exactly, about vector spaces implies an order of operations?

See for reference: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~tao/resource/general/121.1.00s/vec... Addition is only defined on two elements of the space, multiplication is only defined for multiplying an element by a real number, which results in an element. These satisfy the unambiguous distributive axiom, real * (el_1 + el_2) = real * el_1 + real * el_2. Since addition only applies to elements, real * el_1 and real * el_2 must be…

But even in a vector space these examples are still ambiguous.

Re: When Is Cheryl's Birthday?

#117

Post by sukilot » Sat, Apr 25, 2015, 6:54 PM UTC

zhte415 wrote: post #71

baddox wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you think that confusion over the English description is more to blame than the difficulties many people face with logic puzzles?

I do not make a comparison to 'difficulties many people face with logic problems' and did not make an assertion that many people face difficulties with logic puzzles. Getting back to the article: the problem is worded so badly it should be sent back to the author to more coherently express what they think. Specifications, etc...

Or you could learn Singapore English and not demand that everyone translate their work into your dialect.

Re: When Is Cheryl's Birthday?

#118

Post by sukilot » Sat, Apr 25, 2015, 6:57 PM UTC

Nursie wrote: post #108

anigbrowl wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These are actually valid questions and you shouldn't be downvoted. The standard interpretation of the problem is highly questionable; Albert's initial remark is not actually dispositive to Bernhard, because if Bernhard had the 19 May date he would know the correct answer immediately without needing Albert to say anything. The suggestion that Albert's first statement necessarily eliminates all dates in May is false, a…

If we take silence as indicative of lack of knowledge, then nobody needs to speak. Bernard: Silence (he doesn't know the answer) Albert: Silence (he doesn't either) Bernard: I know it! Interestingly it then becomes relevant who was silent first . Basically it's nonsense.

If you assume Albert and Bernard are identical computers running identical programs, then it isn't nonsense. And that's not just a gimmick , timing analysis is how some side-channel attacks work in crypto.

Re: When Is Cheryl's Birthday?

#119

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Apr 25, 2015, 6:57 PM UTC

Nursie wrote: post #108

anigbrowl wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These are actually valid questions and you shouldn't be downvoted. The standard interpretation of the problem is highly questionable; Albert's initial remark is not actually dispositive to Bernhard, because if Bernhard had the 19 May date he would know the correct answer immediately without needing Albert to say anything. The suggestion that Albert's first statement necessarily eliminates all dates in May is false, a…

If we take silence as indicative of lack of knowledge, then nobody needs to speak. Bernard: Silence (he doesn't know the answer) Albert: Silence (he doesn't either) Bernard: I know it! Interestingly it then becomes relevant who was silent first . Basically it's nonsense.

[deleted]

Re: When Is Cheryl's Birthday?

#120

Post by baddox » Sat, Apr 25, 2015, 7:46 PM UTC

sukilot wrote: post #115

baddox wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The hard part is not the logic, it's actually figuring out that this is a logic puzzle that needs to be solved by deduction and not a bunch of nonsense with terrible grammar. I am seeing this claim a lot, but I do not understand it. Why would readers assume that a riddle is a bunch of nonsense, rather than something with an objective answer? > To borrow your Ode To Joy example, it's like trying to learn to play the…

If you learned to play piano in a different notation, Western clef note sheet music would be cryptic. Not everyone has learned the same language of expressing precise concepts.

If someone is a non-native and less than fluent English speaker being presented with this problem in English, then I think your analogy holds. If they are fluent English speakers, however, then I think the inability to translate simple English statements into logical constraints is a failure to solve the logic puzzle itself, not a different type of failure indicating that the problem description is "cryptic" or confusing.