Look at this stupid tweet I found
stupider than the other tweets
Re: Look at this stupid tweet I found
Can't get one past me, I'm 99.68 percentile in probabilistic reasoning.
Re: Look at this stupid tweet I found
that question is sort of ambiguous. what size is each players' deck and how many sol rings are in each of them? what does turn 1 mean - like each player's opening hands with no mulligans, ignoring needing a source of mana to play the sol ring or the possibility of other weird stuff that messes with opening hands? does commander have special rules that i don't understand? i googled a thing and it just said 99 cards (but not highlander? is commander different from EDH? I thought those were the same)
seems pretty simple to hypergeometric it out once you define the question - it's 1 - P(a player doesn't have sol ring)^4
seems pretty simple to hypergeometric it out once you define the question - it's 1 - P(a player doesn't have sol ring)^4
u gotta skate
Re: Look at this stupid tweet I found
ok so then P(not drawing sol ring) = 0.93 -> 1 - (0.93)^4 = 0.25194799A Commander deck is 100 cards and you can’t have more than one of any card that isn’t a basic land.
u gotta skate
Re: Look at this stupid tweet I found
Yes decks are 99 cards and each has one sol ring and your solution is correct. You don't need a hypergeometric it's just 91/99 that one player doesn't have it.
Re: Look at this stupid tweet I found
oh whoops i used 100 when i should have used 99 so it's actually 0.92929 and not 0.93 so 0.25422974923
where is he getting 36 from, that number makes no sense to me
where is he getting 36 from, that number makes no sense to me
u gotta skate
Re: Look at this stupid tweet I found
That was re your first post, you're missing that everyone gets a turn 1 draw. I get 28.6%.
Re: Look at this stupid tweet I found
i think you mean 92/99, unless again I don't understand somethingpterrus wrote:Yes decks are 99 cards and each has one sol ring and your solution is correct. You don't need a hypergeometric it's just 91/99 that one player doesn't have it.
u gotta skate
-
- Adding Machine
- Posts: 218
- Joined: Feb 05, 2019
Re: Look at this stupid tweet I found
ah ok
so then 0.91919 but you're right that the hypergeometric calculator isn't necessary
1-((91/99)^4) = 0.28612069708
so then 0.91919 but you're right that the hypergeometric calculator isn't necessary
1-((91/99)^4) = 0.28612069708
u gotta skate
Re: Look at this stupid tweet I found
Everyone gets a turn 1 draw in multiplayer
Re: Look at this stupid tweet I found
even the first player? PPE: ok, didn't know thatpterrus wrote:That was re your first post, you're missing that everyone gets a turn 1 draw.
ah, lol
u gotta skate
Re: Look at this stupid tweet I found
It's funny in reflection how one tweet where someone is confidently wrong can completely destroy their credibility with me. Like how can I trust jorbs about any probability thing again, fuck.
-
- her skirt got quite a lot smaller,
but her heart is still the same
size it was before - Posts: 12359
- Joined: Jun 13, 2018
Re: Look at this stupid tweet I found
i think anyone can make math mistakes
i made a dumb thermodynamics mistake when lecturing a month ago
i made a dumb thermodynamics mistake when lecturing a month ago
Re: Look at this stupid tweet I found
i'm curious if his approach was correct and his only error was using 36 instead of 32
u gotta skate
-
- Adding Machine
- Posts: 218
- Joined: Feb 05, 2019
Re: Look at this stupid tweet I found
once i was watching another streamer while he made a similar math mistake. he was arrogant and rude to the people in his chat who were saying like "wait isn't the answer X because <reasonable argument>?" so i pretty much stopped watching the guy forever at that moment
Re: Look at this stupid tweet I found
i think his approach actually is wildly wrong though?Crunchums wrote:i'm curious if his approach was correct and his only error was using 36 instead of 32
there aren't 396 choose 32 possible starting arrangements of cards, there are (99 choose 8) * 4
396 choose 32 would be if you shuffled all four players' decks together and then drew 32 cards
u gotta skate
Re: Look at this stupid tweet I found
Yes I would characterize it as wildly wrong unless actually he is a genius on some level I don't comprehend.Crunchums wrote: ↑Thu Dec 29, 2022 4:25 ami think his approach actually is wildly wrong though?Crunchums wrote:i'm curious if his approach was correct and his only error was using 36 instead of 32
there aren't 396 choose 32 possible starting arrangements of cards, there are (99 choose * 4
396 choose 32 would be if you shuffled all four players' decks together and then drew 32 cards
Re: Look at this stupid tweet I found
He was off by 40 percent!
-
- .
How'd you know that loving kittens is my one defining trait? - Posts: 11770
- Joined: Sep 03, 2018
Re: Look at this stupid tweet I found
not me im perfect
wow, [you]. that all sounds terrible. i hope it gets better for you
-
- .
How'd you know that loving kittens is my one defining trait? - Posts: 11770
- Joined: Sep 03, 2018
Re: Look at this stupid tweet I found
his approach gives 29% vs the correct 25% right? if the right numbers are used
wow, [you]. that all sounds terrible. i hope it gets better for you
-
- .
How'd you know that loving kittens is my one defining trait? - Posts: 11770
- Joined: Sep 03, 2018
Re: Look at this stupid tweet I found
so his mistakes were:
- wrong approach
- wrong numbers plugged in
- interpreted the answer he got wrong or just forgot to subtract from 100% (despite stating it right that it was odds of nobody having it!)
- using twitter
- not realizing his answer made no intuitive sense
the last two are most egregious
- wrong approach
- wrong numbers plugged in
- interpreted the answer he got wrong or just forgot to subtract from 100% (despite stating it right that it was odds of nobody having it!)
- using twitter
- not realizing his answer made no intuitive sense
the last two are most egregious
wow, [you]. that all sounds terrible. i hope it gets better for you
-
- "I don’t believe that we will lose life or have to discard cards ourselves."
- Posts: 4489
- Joined: Nov 30, 2019
Re: Look at this stupid tweet I found
good summarySkeletor wrote: ↑Thu Dec 29, 2022 5:01 am so his mistakes were:
- wrong approach
- wrong numbers plugged in
- interpreted the answer he got wrong or just forgot to subtract from 100% (despite stating it right that it was odds of nobody having it!)
- using twitter
- not realizing his answer made no intuitive sense
the last two are most egregious
Re: Look at this stupid tweet I found
- youtuber faces
Re: Look at this stupid tweet I found
- making money