Ludic Fallacy

Post by bezmenov » Fri, Jul 24, 2020, 11:32 PM UTC

Emphere wrote: post #42

Can't help but feel that people here are missing the point and perhaps too hung up on the specific example in the wikipedia article. The broader point is about the misuse and misapplication of technical/"rational" methods in real life i.e. not thinking about whether the model can actually be usefully applied in a certain real world situation. For example, blindly following rote statistical methods/not understanding t…

Post by PhantomGremlin » Sat, Jul 25, 2020, 1:43 AM UTC

quickthrower2 wrote: post #24

And yet companies make a fortune betting on markets or sports using those exact "Ludic Fallacy" models - like linear regressions, probability etc. They know it's real life, and many someone else is fixing the coin toss, but they can still get an advantage. In any real casino, 99 blacks in a row and they'd shut down the table.

   Someone yolo’d a pension fund

Post by krapp » Sat, Jul 25, 2020, 2:03 AM UTC

gowld wrote: post #75

buran77 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand but what I meant by "once" was "exactly once", meaning the first round of the first fight in the championship. It's easy to spot a one trick pony because that's all they try. The second time the opponent would just overwhelm him with superior technique and physical force, we're talking about a national championship, there's no shortage of those. There's only so much pushing you can do when you're met wit…

He copied his martial arts "technique" from the climax of the Karate Kid movie (crane kick trick)? > Wired Magazine’s “Greatest Self-Promoter of 2008” Certainly

Post by quickthrower2 » Sat, Jul 25, 2020, 10:42 AM UTC

aspenmayer wrote: post #29

quickthrower2 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've watched a Thai kickboxing match in Bangkok, and what amazed me, and I didn't expect is that the first few minutes are like dancing, no touching, then it slowly accelerates over say 30 minutes or something to a full out thing. If you can bend the rules in those first 5 minutes, even a sedate developer might stand a chance!

A dance is a pretty good metaphor for full contact sparring with a ref. Any other kind of fight, just don’t. Just get out of there. It’s not worth fighting over for long, if ever. The most OP fighting move is refusing to fight, opting not to strategically, and only fighting when absolutely necessary, like legally or morally necessary. Be like water. Support life and only crash when it’s time to rock and roll.

Post by FeepingCreature » Sun, Jul 26, 2020, 11:18 AM UTC

Ambol wrote: post #52

FeepingCreature wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, but the study has nothing to do with this, because the question was not in real life, but about a fictional scenario. "Assume you jump off a bridge. Would you be dead?" "No, because I'd change my mind. What, you think I'd jump off a bridge because someone tells me to?" "No, but I'd rather expect you'd assume it because I tell you, in the context of a hypothetical."

But this is experts we are talking about. There's supposed to be some degree of translation between models and real life. The point of the fallacy is that this translation can be very debatable and restricted in many fields, and that a good observer with decent intuition can beat those models easily. If this was about a purely intellectual roleplaying game with internal rules there would be no discussion in the first…