Is it likely that Anthropic has some arrangement where mathematicians prove things and then sell attribution for their work to Claude? This seems like it'd be the most cost-effective way to fool people into believing the ai is real and keep the bubble growing
>>539284733Erm is it 2/3?
>>539284733FOR RETARDS IN THE BACK ROWSITS 50% 50%\ITS NOT MONTY HALL PROBLEMREAD THE FUCKING SHIT50% 50%
>>539284733I'd just pick the first box.
>>539284733 i remember reading some math dork talking how AI currently isn't giving reliable and correct answers for complex math questions
>>539285193everything in life is a 50/50 - it either happens or it doesn't
Only retards would pick the silver ball
>>539284733These AI agents have not solved anything new. They have taken old techniques to solve meaningless Erdos problems because nobody has really tried to solve them as algebraic geometers are busy doing work in cryptography and other shit.In math when you use an existing technique it's a nothing burger and everyone assumes the original author simply missed it leaving you the low hanging fruit to pick.If you come up with a new idea then you get all the accolades and shit. So far AI has not done anything new ergo marketing
>>539284733oops forgot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand%27s_box_paradoxAnyway Terence Tao seems to be the #1 grifter and shill right now for AI companies which is surprising. He already makes $500k/yr at UCLA and has million dollar book income not sure why he needs to push the AI math myth so hard when he knows full well it's not doing anything amazing. If it was he would have directed one of these agents to solve something new but hasn't
>>539285193It's 2/3. Go and simulate it with code.Too retarded to do that? Go and simulate it with boxes you find in your house and someone else put the balls (or whatever) in it before.>t. Math student here you retarded nigger.
>>539285655>everything in life is a 50/50 - it either happens or it doesn'tThis is not even retardation anymore. "People" like you shouldn't even have the right tto vote.
Btw, this question came up in our dev chat a couplle years ago.This was my calculation. Throw it into a translator or something.If you're too retarded to understand it, you should talk bullshit how it's 0.5Die Wahrscheinlichkeit ist 2/3, hier mein Lösungsvorschlag. Erstmal die relevanten Ereignisse:G1 = Erster Ball ist Gold.G2 = Zweiter Ball ist Gold.B1 = Kiste 1 wird gewähltB2 = Kiste 2 wird gewähltB3 = Kiste 3 wird gewählt Wir wissen bereits P(B1)=P(B2)=P(B3)=1/3, weil eine der Boxen zufällig gewählt wird.Weiterhin:P(G1|B1) = 1, weil beide Bälle in B1 gold sind.P(G1|B2) = 1/2, weil nur ein Ball in B2 gold ist.P(G1|B3) = 0, weil keiner der Bälle in B3 gold ist.P(G2 und G1) = 1/3, weil nur eine Box zwei goldene Bälle hat. Wir wollen die bedingte Wahrscheinlichkeit P(G2|G1), heißt: Was ist die bedingte Wahrscheinlichkeit, dass der zweite Ball gold ist, wenn der erste es bereits war? Diese ist P(G2|G1) = P(G2 und G1)/P(G1) Für P(G1) wendet man das Gesetz der totalen Wahrscheinlichkeit an:P(G1)= P(G1|B1)*P(B1) + P(G1|B2)*P(B2) + P(G1|B3)*P(B3)= P(G1|B1)*1/3 + P(G1|B2)*1/3 + P(G1|B3)*1/3= 1*1/3 + 1/2*1/3 + 0*1/3 = 2/6 + 1/6 = 1/2 Und damit können wir berechnen: P(G2|G1) = P(G2 und G1)/P(G1) = 1/3 / 1/2 = 2/3 --------Die Abwandlung ohne die Box mit zwei Bällen ergibts dasselbe: P(G2 und G1) = 1/2P(G1) = P(G1|B1)*1/2 + P(G1|B2)*1/2 = 1*1/2 + 1/2*1/2 = 1/2 + 1/4 = 3/4P(G2|G1) = P(G2 und G1) / P(G1) = 1/2 / 3/4 = 1/2 * 4/3 = 4/6 = 2/3
>>539287141READ YOU FUCKING RETARDED CODEMONKEY KYS50% 50%
>>539284733Nobody believes AI is real, they repurposed the term AI and invented the term AGI for marketing purposes.
>>539287415It's 2/3 you retarded black gorilla niggerGo ahead, ban me for racism outside /b/, you other black gorilla nigger
I prefer ChatGPT over Claude.By far.
Claude appears to be an insert to undercut ChatGPT and tighten control.
>>539287627you're making the mistake of counting the times the first ball was gold, but the way the question is put the first ball is always already gold, so the only variability with the next ball from the same box comes from whether you picked it from the box with 2 golds or 1
>>539285339why would it?
>>539287627CODEMONKEYS BEFORE FUCKING KIKES
>>539287141>>539287399>le wall of codeIt’s 50/50 because you’ve already drawn a gold ball so therefore the box with only silver in it is eliminated. You either drew from the box with 2 golds or the mixed box i.e. a 50/50 chance.The absolute state of midwits.
>>539287178>Believing that votes determine policy.
>>539287415There's 2 boxes with gold.You draw gold.That means there is now 3 outcomes.First is you chose the mixed box so 0 probability of getting gold.Second is you chose the all gold box and took the left ball. You have probability of 1 getting another gold.Third is you chose the all gold box and took the right ball. You again have probability of 1 to get another gold.0/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 = 2/3
>>539288255The question says you draw from the same box the second time. Since you’ve already drawn a gold ball, the silver only box is eliminated from the equation.
>>539288166Hey retard, you had a higher chance of picking the gold ball from the full box, leaving 2/3 left, middie.
i finally understand the monty hall problem
>>539287627>ban me for racismheh
>>539288628Decent bait.
>>53928473350/50
>>539288255HOLY FUCKING SHITYOU DREW GOLDTHERE IS NO 3 BALLS LEFT ONLY 1 THATS EITHER SILVER OR GOLDYOU DONT CHANGE BOXESYOU CAN PICK FROM 2 BOXES SINCE YOU MUST PREPULL GOLD BALLMEANING YOU DECIDED OUTCOME ON BOX PICK NOT ON BALL DRAW FIFTY FIFTY YOU FUCKING RETARDED PIECES OF SHIT THAT LED TO WORLD WE LIVE IN
>>539288567It is elimated with 0/3 probability leaving 2/3 outcomes being the gold drawn a second time
>>539289083Hey retard.You chose the all gold box and you actually think it's only probability of 50% that the guaranteed gold ball is the next pic?
>>539287178>does a 360 and walks away
>>539287938Which box is more likely the one that the first ball was picked from?
>>539289323>MEANING YOU DECIDED OUTCOME ON BOX PICK NOT ON BALL DRAW 50% 50% YOU FUCKING JEET
>>539289094>>539289323holy fuck leafs truly are just retarded dog fuckers aren't they. bleak
>>539289083OK now imagine that one of the boxes has 100 gold balls and the other has 1 gold ball and 99 silver balls. Still 50/50 the next ball is gold?
>>539284733I can see into the boxes though. The premise is false.
>>539289440>let's completely change the premise to make an argument for differentYou're a special kind of retard, retard.
>>539289440YES
>>539289449Based.
>>539289392You realize this was already solved in the 1800s right https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand%27s_box_paradox The contradiction is both boxes have different probabilities while you assume both have 50%.
>>539289700THEY ARE WRONGSIMPLE AS
>>539289555Alright let me axe you this... how would you have felt if you didn't have breakfast this morning
>>539289752Or you are retarded
>>539289083Let’s illustrate this problem in a way that even your retard brain can hopefully understand>There are three boxes>Box A has 1,000,000 gold balls>Box B has 1 gold ball and 999,999 silver balls>Box C has 1,000,000 silver ballsYou reach your hand into a box, take a ball, and see that it’s gold.What’s the probability that it came from box B instead of box A?You would have had to get extremely, ridiculously lucky for it to have been box B, so it was almost certainly box A If you still can’t understand, then you are just hopelessly retarded
>>539289831OR YOU HAVE TO CLING FOR WRONG SOLUTION TO JUSTIFY YOUR RETARDATION INSTEAD OF SAYING HOW IM WRONGFUCK YOU JEET YOU ARE SOLE PROBLEM OF THIS WORLDSLURP WHATEVER SHIT THEY TELL YOU WITHOUT THINKING CAUSE YOU CANT
>>539287938It tells you to pick a ball from the box at RANDOM. Not to pick a gold ball. "its a gold ball" is information on the outcome of the previous random selection. But there was a random selection, and you cannot just ignore it. You have to follow the instructions. And if the random selection happens to be silver, then you have to discard that run and do over until you meet the constraint. Its conditional probability.
>>539290067Looks like this anon is dumb and stubbornly proud of his retardation… a deadly combo
>>539288567They're counting the remaining balls. After you draw the first gold ball, you've eliminated the possibility that the box contained 2 silver balls. You could have a million boxes with silver balls and they all become irrelevant after drawing a gold ball. The remaining possibilities are 2 gold balls or 1 silver ball, 3 balls. There is 1 chance out of 3 possibilities that you will pull out a silver ball. There are 2 chances out of 3 that you will pull out a gold ball. Count the balls, not the boxes.
>>539289950STILL TAKING ONE GOLD OUT AS PREREQUISITELEAVING YOU WITH ALL GOLD OR ALL SILVER BALLSIN 2 BOXESYOUR PREPICK MEANING 50% 50% WAS SET IN BOX PICK NOT ON BALL DRAWGTFO NORTH AMERICAN BRAINDEADSFIFTYFIFTYOR IN YOUR CASE SO FUCKING CLOSE TO 50% 50% THAT IT CANT BE CONFUSED EVER FOR 2/3GTFO
>>539290228Wow you are incredibly retarded and just flat out incapable of understanding abstract concepts. Sub 80 IQ confirmed
>>539290283KYS MUTT AND GTFO FROM SERIOUS THREAD
>>539290329I’d tell you to learn about conditional probability so you could stop embarrassing yourself, but it’d be kind of like asking an orangutan to learn physics. Stick to picking your nose and flinging shit around you dumb little monkey
>>539290369GET THE FUCK OUT BRAINDEAD MUTT
If you think it's 50% ask yourself what is the probability of drawing a second gold ball from an all gold box? It's not 50% is a hint. The retard take is to ignore the distribution and solely focus on the next choice like the all caps tardposter. If you want a proof then make a game betting on the final ball being grey and offer 1/2 odds you will be rich because the real odds are 1/3
>>539284733If you record it from the beginning, it's 2/3. If you reset the result after the first pick, it's 50/50.
>>539290228The more silver balls you put into one box while putting an equal amount of gold balls into the other box (or you could mix them all up), the closer the odds approach 50/50 simply because you've got closer to 50/50 the amount of gold and silver balls, but when there are only 3 balls, the odds of pulling out gold are 2/3.
>>539290648YOU OUTCOME IS DECIDED ON 1 OUT OF 2 BOX PICK 10TH FUCKING TIME
>>539290715You start with two boxes, one with 2 gold balls and 98 silver balls. The other box has 1 gold ball and 99 silver balls. What are the odds that the next ball you pull from the same box is gold?
>>539284733>where mathematicians prove things and then sell attribution for their work to ClaudeIsn't all the proofs and stuff, already submitted in papers and such?They wouldn't sell the AI people their hard work that could get them a Fields medal.
>>539290168The question stipulates the second ball is taken from same box. The choice was made on the box level, and since a gold ball was drawn it means the 2x silver box is irrelevant. The question is "did you choose box a or box b" 50/50. In fact, the first ball is irrelevant because it's outcome was already decided, it has to be gold, so you can further reduce the question to blindly grabbing 1 of 2 balls and what the percentage it will be gold vs silver will be. Simple as.
This is incredibly easy if you think about it for more than 5 seconds. You picked a ball at random. It could be gold or silver. However, you know it's gold, so you either picked the first gold ball, the second, or the third with an equal chance of picking any of them. From left to right you could label them g1, g2, and g3. If you picked g1, then it's the first box. If you picked g2, then it's the first box. If you picked g3, then it's the second box. 2/3 chance of it being the first box. If you're too stupid to wrap your head around this then you can at least read this post and even gorilla iq brainlets can understand it's not 50/50.>>539290168
>>539285176>Erm is it 2/3?Yes, it is. But every shingle time this is posted some retard will incorrectly scream that it's 50%There are 3 Gold Balls: G1, G2, and G3Here are how those picks play out:1. Pick G1 -> other ball MUST be G22. Pick G2 -> other ball MUST be G13. Pick G3 -> other ball MUST be S1Therefore 2/3rds of the time you pick a gold ball, the other ball will be gold.
>>539291071They will pretend not understand even such a simple and clear explanation so they can keep proudly being stupid.
>>539291262>>539291071CASE ONEYOU PULLED OUT GOLD FROM BOX 1 NEXT ONE IS GOLDCASE TWOYOU PULLED OUT GOLD FROM BOX 2 NEXT ONE IS SILVERFIFTY FIFTY YOU FUCKING RETARDED PIECES OF SHITDECIDED ON BOX PICK NOT ON DRAW
>>539284733Consider a /pol/ adapted version of the scenario.>A neighborhood has 3 houses: one with a lesbo couple, one with a gay couple, and one with a heterosexual couple>You don't know which is which, because they all have pride libtard flags on their lawn>You knock on one of the doors and hope to call the gays or lesbos a homophobic slur>A man opens the doorWhat is the probability that this guy is a faggot?
>>539291448CASE ONEYOUR TICKET MATCHES THE LOTTERY NUMBERSCASE TWOIT DOESN’TWINNING THE LOTTERY IS 50/50 YOU RETARDS, THE DRAWING ALREADY HAPPENED THE RESULT IS SET IN STONE!!!!
>>539289440yes
>>539291262Simply make a game Every round pay the retards $20 of a $10 bet if the next ball drawn is not gold. If it is gold you keep the bet. Once the retards lose all their money they will realize it's only 1/3 probability of the next ball not being gold
>>539291853YOU CANT SWITCH BOXES YOU FUCKING RETARDED PIECE OF SHIT
>>539291546Probability of 1, liberal suburbia is entirely gay.
>>539290168> Count the balls, not the boxes.Correct answer, wrong reasoning. It just so happens the flawed reasoning gets the right answer in this specific case. To illiterate this. What if there were 3 balls in the first box. The probability should still be 2/3, but now your counting the balls solution gets a different answer.
>>539292051Nobody switched anything.Play this game yourself with 3 boxes. Whatever ball you pick make a bet the next ball you choose out of the same box is a different color. Your probability of winning is only 33%
>>539292255Correct! Logical reasoning isn't really so difficult.
>>539292661HOW DO YOU PULL GOLD BALL FROM THIRD BOX YOU FUCKING ILLITERATE GARBAGE OF A HUMAN
>>539292560>Correct answer, wrong reasoning. It just so happens the flawed reasoning gets the right answer in this specific case. To illiterate this. What if there were 3 balls in the first box. The probability should still be 2/3, but now your counting the balls solution gets a different answer.Considering that there's an equal number of balls in each box, counting the balls is a quick way to get to the correct answer. You're introducing a hypothetical scenario that isn't part of the original problem so you can split hairs.
>>539292780You can't read at all learn English
>>539291066>the 2x silver box is irrelevantCorrect. >The choice was made on the box levelBut the odds depend on the number of possibilities with respect to the balls. > the first ball is irrelevantIt's relevant in that it sets up the actual problem. The box with the two silver balls is a distraction. > grabbing 1 of 2 ballsBut there are three possible outcomes, 2 of which are picking gold balls, and 1 of which is picking the silver ball. >>539292560> What if there were 3 balls in the first box. The probability should still be 2/3,Assuming that you mean there are 3 balls in the box you've already drawn a ball from and 2 balls in the other box, leaving two balls in each box to choose from then the odds are x/4, with x being the number of gold balls.
>>539293241>> grabbing 1 of 2 balls>But there are three possible outcomes, 2 of which are picking gold balls, and 1 of which is picking the silver ball.THERE ARE NO 3 POSSIBLE OUTCOMES ONLY 2THERE IS NO G1 G2 G3ITS ONLY NEXT BALL FROM THE 1 OUT OF 2 BOXES YOU PICKED GOLD BALL FROMAND ITS EITHER GOLD OR SILVERAND THAT ONLY DEPENDS ON WHICH 1/2 BOXES YOU PICKED GOLD BALL FROM.
I wonder if the belief of a 2/3rd's chance correlates to any other over-socialized beliefs and behaviors.How many of you 2/3 truthers are Vaxx recipients?
>>539293619In last thread we did it turned out to be something around 90% and all of the were reddit tourists with muh "le proven science"
>>539293241By first box I meant the left most box. So my proposed alteration would be.[GGG] [GS] [SS]Its should be obvious that adding additional gold balls to the gold only box makes no difference. The box will always give you a gold ball every time you draw from it, and extra gold balls don't change that.
>>539288628Look at this nigger posing as a probability math expert.Listen here you chimp, probability is always 50/50. You can wrap as many stupid formulas and calculations around your dump empty head as you wish, but end of the day the “thing” is either happening or not. 2 possible outcomes = 50/50. Applicable to literally any life situation. Chances that you will be diagnosed with ass cancer? 50/50. Chances of OP being faggot? 50/50. My chance to get vanned today? 50/50.Easy as that.
The question ends with "you have chosen one gold ball". That eliminates the double silvers. You are going back into the SAME box. You either have the double gold and you pull Gold, or you have the mixed and you pull Silver. It is 50% - pull second gold or pull silver - no other options. You all think this is the game show problem where the odds are now different. How could you think you have a denominator or 3, implying 3 choices. There are only 2 balls in each box - one gold is pulled and you are pulling one more. One winning move with 2 possibilities.
>>539293675lol
>>539293904But, even if we’ll put aside this philosophy, mathematical answer to the question in OP pick is 50%.You already draw gold ball, so you have only 2 scenarios left (silver box not relevant anymore) - the second ball either will be gold or silver with equal chances. That’s 50-50.Anyone who answers otherwise should hang themselves.
>>539293969>>539294216Brainlets. Brainlets everywhere.
>>539293462you need to read the text, dude. it says 'you pick a box at random. you put your hand in and take a ball from that box at random' --> that is all one action. a single action. that means there are 3 balls you could have picked.
>>539293969Simple which gold did you select because there are 3. That's the total distribution. Imagine you took from the all gold box is the probability of the next one being gold only 50%? No. Hence why that answer is wrong. You have to combine the distribution of both boxes because you don't know which box you are in. That is the total probability
all 50/50 anons beleve in god too
>>539294647Gold balls one two and three are not ordered in any way. It doesn't matter what bin the first gold was pulled from. You have one pull and two choices - gold or silver. There is no other way no matter how complex you try to make it.
>>539293969>>539294216>>539293462>>539289083The first box is a more likely explanation for the gold ball in your hand. It's less likely that you got a gold in your hand on the first pull by picking the second box. That's why it's 2/3.
>>539294647The distribution of the balls isn't a factor, only the boxes themselves are a factor. You can't mix and match between boxes, thus it makes no sense to say that there are three gold balls. The box you picked from either has 1 remaining gold ball or 0. That fact won't be influenced by a theoretical third ball in another box you aren't interacting with, thus it isn't part of the equation. Same reason why the all silver box is nothing more than a red herring.
>>539295060This isn't "complex" at all. If you've read this thread and somehow are unable to wrap your head around the fact that it's 2/3 at this point then the only way you're going to realize you're wrong is to literally go make the boxes with marbles or something yourself and try it.
>>539287141Its 50/50 like >>539288166 proves. Im losing faith in Germany here.
>>539284733
>>539290168>Count the balls, not the boxes.No, you are drawing from the same box
>>539284733ai corps have the means and will to do so and its unnecessary, ai wil make math proofs ezits open season on encryption
>>539295581>No, you are drawing from the same boxHow is it possible that this many people are missing the point after it's already been explained? You count the balls because it tells you the probability that you're holding one box vs another box, which is a prerequisite for answering the question.
>>539284733the answer is nigger
>>539288255Nah it's 50/50You can ruld out the silver/silver since the first ball was goldSo it's either gold/gold (won)Or silver/goldProove me wrong (you can't)
>>539295581That is what they don't understand. When you are told, "It is a gold ball", that does two things; eliminates the double silvers and tells you there is only ONE ball left to choose as you have to choose from the same box. These guys think there are 3 options and two are winners. Not the case. There is ONE ball left and it is gold - you drew the first from the double gold box OR silver - you drew first from the mixed box.
>more replies relating to OP's pic instead of OP's question.Holy fuck. At least two thirds of you ITT are retarded.>>539284733I'd say it's possible that mathmaticians from the many different companies in the bubble are involved. It wouldn't just be anthropic though. Didn't it get sanctioned by the US gov at some point or was that recinded?
>>539293790Ok, so you pick a gold ball. The SS box is eliminated. Didn't even need to bring it up at all. What's left is a box with GG and another box with GS. There are 4 balls that could possibly be drawn next, 3 of which are gold. Your odds of drawing a gold ball next is 3/4. >>539293462> ONLY 2No. Even the boxes themselves are irrelevant because you DON'T KNOW WHICH BOX YOU PICKED. It would be the same as having a bag with 4 balls in it, 1 silver and 3 gold. You pick a gold ball, so there are 2 gold balls out of 3 total balls left in the bag. The odds of the next ball coming out being G is 2/3.
>>539290168>Count the balls, not the boxes.Not, count the boxes, the balls are irrevelant, you either in the good or wrong box
>>539296125>>539295964Just make the boxes you smooth brained tards.
>>539295581But you don't know which box that is. There's a 2/3 chance it's the box with the other gold ball because there are 3 possibilities of what the next ball can be and 2 of them are gold.
>>539296242No need to make a silver/silverI pick one of the two box, it's either silver/gold or gold/gold, either wrong or right>But muh number of balls Irrevelant
>>539296323No, it's either gold or silver>But muh science, muh number of ballsIrrevelant, it's either silver/gold or gold/gold
>>539295060Both boxes have different probability so yes it does matter which box you are in and which gold you picked. You are claiming there is a single box with 2 golds and 1 silver so next choice is 50/50 if you choose gold.However there is two boxes with different distributions so you have to add them together.
>>539288166>You either drew from the box with 2 golds or the mixed box i.e. a 50/50 chancethis sentence is wrong. the correct version:You either drew from the box with 2 golds, or the box with 2 golds or the mixed box. out of the 3 pull possibilities (not 2 as you stated) which are all equally likely (so 1/3), odds are 2/3 that its goldthe gold pull does not simplify away due it being in both boxes. its just one extra possibility. only in equation you can simplify away common terms, but in probability, they are not canceled out, they are counted! this is our error
>>539296538Yes, go make those 2 boxes, then scramble them every time and try it. Youre so close to realizing you are retarded. Seriously, do it.
>>539295964There are three possible things that just happened to explain the gold ball in your hand, and two of them happen in the first box.
>>539296619>>539296659Nah, it's either silver/gold or gold/gold
>>5392966591/2 BOX PICK PRECEDES THAT YOU FUCKING RETARD
>>539296684Nah, it's 1/2
>>539296659>3 pull possibilities (not 2 as you stated) which are all equally likely (so 1/3), odds are 2/3 that its goldWould be revelant if the remaning balls were in the same box but they aren't50/50, cope
>>539296082You are only drawing at most two balls from the GG+ box, each ball you draw from that box is always gold. What possible effect could adding more balls to that box make.You're thinking about it wrong. The ratios matter, not the absolute number of balls. The first box is 100% gold no matter how many gold balls are in the box.
Let's make it 2 steps like the Monty Hall problem.At the start there are 3 boxes with 6 balls. 3 balls are gold, 3 are silver. You pick a ball out of a random box. It's silver. The odds that you pick silver (or gold) are 3/6, 50%. The odds that the next ball you take from the same box is gold has DECREASED because you've eliminated 2 out of the 6 balls and you know what 1 of the 6 balls is. You went from 6 possibilities to 3. Only one of the possibilities is a gold ball. Now your odds of the next ball being gold is 1/3. Start over. You pick a ball out of a random box. It's gold. Your chances of picking gold was 50%. Same as above. Now that you've picked gold, the chances that you've picked the box with 2 gold in it INCREASES because you've eliminated 2 out of the 6 balls and you know what 1 of the 6 balls is. You went from 6 possibilities to 3. Now, unlike above, 2 of the possibilities is a gold ball. Now your odds of the next ball being gold is 2/3.
>>539296755You're either a retard or you're not. One or the other. Must be 50 50. (Just kidding, it's 100%)
>>539296922Nah it's 50 50
>>539296922>The odds that the next ball you take from the same box is gold has DECREASED because you've eliminated 2 out of the 6 balls and you know what 1 of the 6 balls is. You went from 6 possibilities to 3. Only one of the possibilities is a gold ball. Now your odds of the next ball being gold is 1/3.Nah it's 50 50, silver/silver is irrevelant, it's either gold/gold or gold/silver
>>53928519350% is the answer for a similar but different riddle. For this one it's not
For the 50 50 retards, here's a power shell simulation deepseek whipped up in 5 seconds. Feel free to try it. When you realize you're an idiot, no need to apologize. It's not your fault you're stupid. # Bertrand's box paradox simulation$iterations = 100000$validTrials = 0$secondIsGold = 0# Define boxes: 0=GG, 1=GS, 2=SS$boxes = @( @("G", "G"), @("G", "S"), @("S", "S"))for ($i = 0; $i -lt $iterations; $i++) { # Pick a random box and a random ball from it $boxIndex = Get-Random -Minimum 0 -Maximum 3 $ballIndex = Get-Random -Minimum 0 -Maximum 2 $firstBall = $boxes[$boxIndex][$ballIndex] # Only count trials where the first ball drawn is gold if ($firstBall -eq "G") { $validTrials++ # The other ball is at index 1 - $ballIndex $otherIndex = 1 - $ballIndex $secondBall = $boxes[$boxIndex][$otherIndex] if ($secondBall -eq "G") { $secondIsGold++ } }}# Calculate empirical probability$probability = $secondIsGold / $validTrialsWrite-Host "Trials where first ball was gold: $validTrials"Write-Host "Among those, second ball was gold: $secondIsGold"Write-Host "Estimated probability: $probability"Write-Host "Theoretical probability: 2/3 ≈ 0.666666..."
>>539296913Dang. You're right. It's not 3/4. It's still 2/3.
>>539285193It's 66% because there 3 balls in play
>>539297242KYS RETARDED CODEMONKEYITS DECIDED ON BOX PICK NOT ON DRAW50 50
2 gold and 1 silver in a SINGLE box creates a 50% chance of gold again if you choose gold first try. The gold distro was 2 now it's 1.3 gold and 1 silver in 2 boxes has a completely different distribution if you pull out a gold. There was 3 gold and now there's 2 gold and you don't know which box you're in. Now there's a 66% chance the next one is gold too.This isn't very difficult
>>539285176>>539287141>>539287627>>539290598>>539291262It's 50% you retards
>>539297374It's the same thing dumbass. Either 33% each ball or 66% box 1 33% box 2.
>>539297242Can you make one that starts with the 2 boxes, GG and GS?
>>539287090>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand%27s_box_paradoxGGGSSSall possible permutations:1.) draw #1 (G)G - draw #2 G(G)2.) draw #1 G(G) - draw #2 (G)G3.) draw #1 (G)S - draw #2 G(S)permutation 1 & 2 are wins.permutation 3 is a loss.2/3.having said that my answer is still 50%.once a G is drawn, there is no distinction to me whether its G(G) or (G)G - those are both the same because its in the past and it won't repeat again, as such it can never be the other way around, so it is reduced to 1 permutation, not 2 distinct. i do not differentiate. thus the real permutations are:1.) draw #1 (G)G - draw #2 G(G)2.) draw #1 (G)S - draw #2 G(S)permutation 1 is a winner.permutation 2 is a loss.1/2!(G)G and G(G) are 2 perspectives of the one and same permutation, when the draw already happened. if it did not happen, they are 2 distinct possibilities, so we would count 2 permutations, but since 1 pull already happened, they collapse into 1 permutation, because whichever way you look at it (perspective shift), its 1 permutation, thus (G)G = G(G).you guys got cucked by the mainstream, by cuckapedia and cuckematics
>>539297559ITS FUCKING NOT SAME YOU FUCKING RETARDPREREQ IS ONE GOLD BALL OUT NO MATTER WHATSO YOU ARE LEFT WITH NEXT ONE BEING EITHER SILVER OR GOLDYOU CAN HAVE 100 GOLD BALLS IN BOX ONE AND 1 SILVER AND 1 GOLD IN BOX 2CHANCES OF YOU PULL NEXT ONE GOLD AFTER YOU HAVE GOLD BALL IN HAND FROM SAME BOX ARE 50 50 NO MATTER WHAT AND ITS DECIDED ON BOX PICK NOT ON DRAWBOOSTERS NOW
>>539297562Here you go. # Simulation using only GG and GS boxes (SS excluded, as requested)$iterations = 100000$validTrials = 0$secondIsGold = 0# Define only the two relevant boxes$boxes = @( @("G", "G"), # Box 0 @("G", "S") # Box 1)for ($i = 0; $i -lt $iterations; $i++) { # Pick a random box (0 or 1) and a random ball (0 or 1) $boxIndex = Get-Random -Minimum 0 -Maximum 2 $ballIndex = Get-Random -Minimum 0 -Maximum 2 $firstBall = $boxes[$boxIndex][$ballIndex] # Only count trials where the first ball drawn is gold if ($firstBall -eq "G") { $validTrials++ # The other ball is at index 1 - $ballIndex $otherIndex = 1 - $ballIndex $secondBall = $boxes[$boxIndex][$otherIndex] if ($secondBall -eq "G") { $secondIsGold++ } }}$probability = $secondIsGold / $validTrialsWrite-Host "Trials where first ball was gold: $validTrials"Write-Host "Among those, second ball was gold: $secondIsGold"Write-Host "Estimated probability: $probability"Write-Host "Theoretical probability: 2/3 ≈ 0.666666..."
>>539297311But only 2 box and you choosed a box
>>539297728You picked at random. Half the time you reach into box 2, it's a silver ball. How would you feel if you didn't eat breakfast?
>>539297475>you don't know which box you're in.So it's 50 50
>>539297838FUCK YOU AND YOUR FUCKING BREAKFAST MIDWIT ANALOGY WHILE NOT UNDERSTANDING THAT THAT QUESTION BEING THROWN AT PRISONERS DIRECTLY MEAN THEY WERE RAILED IN THEIR ASSES IN CELL INSTEAD OF BEING AT BREAKFASTKYS REDDITOR NOT EVEN JOKING
>>539288255>>539288628>>539289094It's 50%. The probability is taken only after the first ball is removed, per the question.So while those that think it is 2/3 are factoring in 2 boxes (the box with 2 silver balls is irrelevant) only one box should be figured because the only relevant box to the equation is the one from which you have already drawn the first ball. So it is either box 1 or 2, but you have already removed one ball so there is only 1 ball remaining and it is either gold or silver.The answer is 50%Counting the balls in 2 boxes is incorrect
>>539297754> $boxIndex = Get-Random -Minimum 0 -Maximum 2> $ballIndex = Get-Random -Minimum 0 -Maximum 2> $firstBall = $boxes[$boxIndex][$ballIndex] || <- error, firstBall is ALREADY picked and is ALREADY gold in the posed question!!this is wrong code. you are starting at 0 draws.the question asserts draw 1 already happened and is in the past.read this if you want to understand what i mean: >>539297724its a reading comprehension problem. you are answering an altogether different question, then the one posed originally. im sorry but i have to break this to you - you are a midwit...
>>539297867>you don't know which box you're in.>So it's 50 50>You don't know whether or not you will be probed by aliens on the way home from work Oh, so it's one or the other. Must be 50 50.
>>539297938Why get mad at morons? They can't reason correctly so they've convinced themselves they're right. They'll just continue being wrong and it will change nothing. I know you're right. Well done
>>5392980162 box Either silver/gold or gold/gold, the 3rd one silver/silver is irrevelant since the ball was goldNow it's only gold/silver, 1/2, 50-50
lol wtf. I had this EXACT fucking thought when I saw that "famous conjecture disproven with AI!" viral post Where is the actual proof that it was AI that magically came up with it, by itself? Seriously - What if some mathematician found a counterexample, worked with an AI company to release the news with some sexy headline that AI solved it? that whole thing smells fishy as fuckI need absolute, irrefutable proof that AI came up with that counterexample by itself. I call bullshit. This is just some marketing trick until proven otherwise.
>>539297986>its a reading comprehension problem. you are answering an altogether different question, then the one posed originally. im sorry but i have to break this to you - you are a midwit...Hey idiot, the first draw determines what box you are in. It's cause and effect. You don't suddenly ignore everything that just happened because you found out the ball is gold. If there were 1 trillion gold balls in the first box and one in one trillion gold balls in the second box, and you reached into one at random and picked gold, you wouldn't say "well I'll be, it's a gold ball. There's a 50% chance this is box 2 and a 50% chance I just drew the one in one trillion ball from box 2"Well, I guess you would, because you're a tard.
>>539298242Run the script, smooth brain. If you are able to figure out how to use power shell (it's not hard).
>>539298354>It's cause and effect. You don't suddenly ignore everything that just happened because you found out the ball is gold.no, the implication of having drawn 1 gold ball is thatyou are either in the box with GG or in the box GS.you are implying that you are either in the box with GG, or in the box with GG (the mistake) or in the box GS.there are no 3 such cases, ONLY 2.(G)G = G(G).try to entertain the idea, instead of attacking.does the dancer turn clockwise or counterclockwise? its illusory and it takes a bit of effort to see it go the other way. try to understand this by entertaining the idea instead of outright refusing it. then you will be able to fully judge the position, before dismissing it because you think you are right.
>>539298502The idea has been entertained. This has been talked about across dozens if not hundreds of threads here and fucking everywhere else. The answer is 2/3. If you do not understand yet, then feel free to make the boxes yourself, scramble them every time, follow the instructions as written and record your results.
>>53929870850% 50%DECIDED ON 1/2 BOX PICK
>>539298502Yes, you are either in GG or GS so what is the NEW distribution? 2G and 1S or 2/3Congrats you solved it
>>539298708>If you do not understand yet, then feel free to make the boxes yourself, scramble them every time, follow the instructions as written and record your results.as you can clearly see from:>>539297724i do understand both viewpoints.i however raise an important point, which you are not nuanced enough to accept because you are on your high horse because you think you are 100% right.and your code is wrong. i already showed that to you. you are simulation a completely different thing. im gonna stop engaging with you, there is no helping the midwit it seems.
> it's pick random and then pick random, making it a random choice with prob = 1/6> you pick 1 out of 6 at random with equal probability> it's gold, which is additional information> you now are reduced to 3 possible cases, all were picked with equal prob. 2/3
>>539298843You are unable to read. Bye.
>>539298242You don't know which box you have. So you basically have a superposition of two boxes that contains 3 balls.
>>539284733the answer is 50%i couldn't recall the definition of conditional probability, but you can solve it without that.
>>539298900THERE IS ONLY 1 OUTCOME WHEN YOU HAVE GOLD BALL IN YOUR HAND RETARDEITHEROR50%
>>539298787>GGyou are counting GG as two distinct possibilities. that is your flaw. and you too are incapable to see beyond it.if you are in GG, its a win.if you are in GS, its a loss.thus 50%!because the 1st draw is FIXED. there is no (G)G and G(G) distinction, its one and the same thing and people don't get it.
>>539288255all the leaves are brown
>>539298787if you pick the 1g1s box there is a 50:50 chance of it being silverif you pick 2g0s it's 100% goldtherefore if you've picked a gold ball, you are twice as likely to have picked it from the 2g boc
>>539297311That is what the 2/3 crew can't understand.When the first gold ball was selected, it eliminated the Silver/Silver box, so they believe there are 3 balls left in play. But, It ALSO eliminated the non selected box. There is actually only ONE box left with ONE ball, we just don't know if it was Gold/Gold or Gold/Silver that was eliminated.Only one ball is still in play when the 2nd pull is made. There isn't 3 possibilities ... you pull the only ball left and it can be Gold or Silver.
>>539299456Ready to have your mind blown? You see that second gold ball in the first box that you conveniently ignored? Here's a hint, that's the key to figuring out where you went wrong.
>>539299621YOU CANT CHANGE BOXES RETARDED RETARD
>>539284733It’s either 100% or 0% depending on which of the boxes with gold balls you picked at random
>>539299456We have divine souls. 50%ers will inherit the kingdom of heaven
>>539299674Never implied changing boxes. Do you speak English?
>>539297724The results of the Bertrands box paradox are incorrectYou probably think relativity is real too
>>539299772THE YOUR END RESULT IS PREDETERMINED WITH BOX 1/2 PICK50% 50%
>>539284733> i didnt have to pull out my balls and hold them?> erm i guess ill put my balls onto this box?
>>539287627Can't code worth shit, you are still counting the 2 silver ball box in attempts. Which has already been excluded by the nature of the question.
>>539298996So you claim running this experiment 100x should be silver is the next ball around 50/100 times right? Because 50% probability.What's the probability you chose the GS and not the GG box? See this is where the 50% claim goes out the wíndow Get AI to write you a program of 3 boxes GG, GS, SS. Whatever ball the program randomly chooses ask if the opposite ball is chosen next and record everytime this is wrong.
>>539299621You're a midwit
>>539299949The code will factor it out as well. It doesn't matter if he leaves it in or not.
>>539299621Ready to have your mind blown?When the game 'starts' there is only one ball left in play. The first pull of gold sets the box and eliminates the other two. We know silver/silver is gone because gold was not a possibility. We just done know if gold/gold or gold/silver was also eliminated.It will hit you at some point. Just focus on ... ONLY ONE BALL IS LEFT.
>>539299456>There isn't 3 possibilities ... you pull the only ball left and it can be Gold or Silverthis IS exactly it. they can not grasp it. i bet its because "science says so". i can further deduce that they are triple vaxxed and their wives' boyfriend are their best friend.they truly believe that the GG box represents 2 possibilities, but you completely showed them that it does not.they trust established mainstream "truths", when science has always been corrected and refined, over and over. someone needs to edit that wikipedia article and write a little thesis shitpaper to poop over these idiots.>>539299736alhamdulilah
2/3ers are acting like there are 4 balls in 1 box: GGGS.We are only talking about 1 box with either GG or GS. If you draw the gold ball 1st, the probability of the next ball being gold is 50%The number of balls in other boxes is meaningless.
>>539299834We need to think of a tranny example so these faggots can understandYou either have a Cock, a Vagina, or a Gapingfleshwound hole You stick your cock into it, therefore its not a cock. The next pump will decide if it is vagina or a frankenpussyIf the pump splits and shits, its a frankenpussyIf the pump squishes and squirts, its a pussyWhat is the probability its a real vagina if your dick fits into it.
>>539300195There's 2 boxes.Box 1 has one trillion gold balls. Box 2 has one trillion minus 1 silver balls, and one gold ball. You reach in and pull out a gold ball. What are the chances that the next one will be gold? Do you just assume there's an equal chance of you picking any random ball in box 1 as a one in a trillion pick in box 2 because you happen to now know that the ball is gold?
>>539300101You can feel free to run the power shell code I had deepseek whip up above or check the python screenshot the other guy posted if you're too lazy to try making the boxes yourself.
>>539300491Forget the first pull entirely. You already have that figured out, so we eliminate box #3. So you have a box of 100 million trillion gold balls and a box of 100 million trillion silver balls. What is the chance you'll pull a gold ball.I believe in you
>>539300651Why would I want to do things wrong?
>>539291262It’s 50% you retard.You got gold on the first draw so it can’t be box 3 with two silver.Next draw from the same box means it will either be the box with another gold or the one with one remaining silver.Hence, 50:50.
>>539284733Previous session summary (3 topics):1) Topic: Bertrand's box paradox / two gold ball probability problem.User argues the answer is 1/2 (50%) after drawing one gold ball, claiming the first draw determines the box and the silver-silver box is irrelevant. User lists permutations, gets 2/3 but rejects the collapse step. User becomes hostile (calls AI "clanker").AI consistently argues 2/3: the gold-gold box is more likely to have produced the observed gold draw. Uses user's own trillion-ball example (Box 1 all gold vs Box 2 one go...2) Topic: Bertrand's box paradox dispute. User insists that after drawing one gold ball, the second ball is always 50/50 gold/silver. Assistant maintains the answer is 2/3 gold, because a gold draw is more likely to come from the GG box (two gold balls) than the GS box, so boxes are not equally weighted after conditioning. Boxes: GG, GS, SS. Assistant repeatedly offered 6-million-run simulations rejecting non-gold draws. Key point: if user pre-selects a specific box (e.g. putting a pig in box 1)...3) Topic: Bertrand's box paradox (three boxes: GG, GS, SS). User insists that once holding a gold ball as the game's start, only GG or GS remain, so odds of second ball being gold are 50/50. Assistant repeatedly corrects: probability is 2/3, not 1/2, because a gold ball in hand is twice as likely to come from GG (two gold balls G1, G2) as from GS (one gold ball G3). "Two outcomes" does not mean equal probability. User rejects restart-experiment framing; assistant accepts the single-moment framin...Bot activated. All cleared. Model: claude-opus-4-8 | Mode: exp | Tokens since last start: 65974 | $0.626 | 1h:17minKI IS TOTALLY RETARDEDit's of course 50%/50%
>>539300734>Forget the first pull entirely.I know you'd love to just pretend that cause and effect doesn't exist so that you can feel like you've won something but I'm afraid you're still retarded.
>>53928473350
>>5393007342/3
>>539300405You're twice as likely to get a gold-first draw by picking the double box than you are to get one by picking the half and half box.The ball counts matter because that information tells you how likely each box is as an explanation for the gold ball in your hand.
>>539299456Your argument also says silver is chosen 50% of the time except there's 1 silver in those 2 boxes. Still think you'll get 50 silvers if you run this experiment 100 times?
>>539300734>>539300883It's 2/3 IF you picked a gold ball out of the box first. If you didn't and you're just presented with two boxes, one with all gold and one with all silver THEN it'll be 50/50, but that's NOT the original problem.
>>539300491In your trillion example there is a 'choice' on the second pull ... there is no choice in our game. There is one box left with one ball in it. The first pull of the gold ball eliminates two of the boxes ... the one without a gold ball AND the one not chosen.
>>539301008DAMMIT. It's not 2/3 anymore. Now it's 2 out of 2x 100 million trillion.
>>539300878>>539300883The whole question is built around the probability after the first gold ball is pulled. So you either pulled the only gold ball out of the box of silver balls or you removed one gold ball put of the gold ball box. Either way, you are left with a box of:Either100 million trillion gold ballsOr100 million trillion silver ballsWhat is the probability your next ball will be gold.You can try and gummy up the math but its clear and you've Either been reading the question wrong, or you're just not that smart. Ill leave that answer up to you
>>539289388If that was the question, we'd care about the probability of picking a sovler irst and the question would ask "what is the chance of pulling gold again IF you pull gold on the first try vs 'you already pulled gold'>>539289950Say there were additional 100000 million boxes with a trillion silver balls each in your scenario. What is the chance you picked any of those boxes if you pull 1 gold ball, you gambler's fallacy having morherfucker?The low chance of picking a gold in a mostly silver box is irrelevant once it is stated to have happened.>I won the lottery. The bonus prize is either doubling my winnings, or a honda civic>Um well the chance of you winning the lottery is low so it didnt happen and actuallyyyyyFuck off
It’s 50%This is known as the famous summerfag problem
>>539300760>>539300852It’s funny how people who actually understand the problem and the math behind it can easily model the entire problem and code a simulation to prove their math is correct, but retards who don’t even understand the problem can’t do the same. Despite this, you continue to double down in your retardation and act like you know what you’re talking about even though it’s clear to anyone with triple digit IQ that you don’t.
>>539301078>>539300852>>539300838>>539300405If you were playing this game and the second box had a trillion silver balls and one gold, you'd very easily and intuitively say, "There's no fucking way I got that lucky and grabbed the ONE gold ball in a trillion. This is definitely the first box."It's 2/3 because the same logic applies with smaller numbers of balls.
>>539301155there's pilpul behind it , not math Yank
>>539301022>In your trillion example there is a 'choice' on the second pull ... there is no choice in our game. There is one box left with one ball in it. The first pull of the gold ball eliminates two of the boxes ... the one without a gold ball AND the one not chosen.My example also eliminates the one not chosen. You can even include a third box with a trillion silver balls if you like. If you understand why it's absurd that there's a 50 50 chance when choosing a box with a trillion silver balls and a single gold, then you are getting closer to the correct answer here. Is this something that you understand?
>>539301078The chance that I pulled a gold ball out of the second box is so astronomically low that it might as well be zero. I can attempt to find the 1/1000000000000 gold ball my entire life and never get it because it’s so fucking unlikely to begin with. Therefore if I picked a gold ball at random, it tells me with nearly 100% certainty that it came from the first box
>>539301078>What is the probability your next ball will be gold.The first gold ball being pulled is important and cannot be ignored. If you're presented with a box of all gold and a box of all silver and you just pick one of the boxes, you have a 50/50 chance of picking gold or silver, but if one of those boxes has one gold ball and the other has all gold balls and you pull a gold ball at random, it's certainly not a 50/50 shot that the next ball you pull from that same box is going to be gold.
>>539301227It’s simple math. You are quite literally too retarded to even discuss this. Stick to jacking off and burping and shitting like the retrograde animal you are
>>539301078>Either>100 million trillion gold balls>Or>100 million trillion silver ballsSo 50 50 shot right? 50% chance you picked the box with nearly a trillion silver balls? Please confirm, I need a good laugh.
>>539300886But we are are determining the probably AFTER the first ball is picked
>>539301308i feel bad for ya dude
>>539301008Its 2/3 probability you choose a box that has a gold ball in it Its 2/3 probability you choose a box with silver ball in it once you have observed the gold ball in your hands, there is no way it is the box with 2 silver balls So the probability is 50%, you either picked the G-G box or the G-S box. However, if the question is, of the three possible balls remaining, how many are golden and how many are silver2 gold, 1 silver, so its 2/3 of the population but a 50% chance you picked from 1 of the 2 boxes that could result in another gold ball MATH IS ONLY FORE WHITE KIKE HATING MENIf you do not spiritually hate the jew, the spells in jew math will turn you into a midwit
>>539301384Go ahead and model it if you think your math is correct. Go test your hypothesis and see how it actually works in reality.If everyone had the same understanding of math and statistics as you, we’d still be living in mud huts
>>539301155If you want to really fuck with people ask them to do this as a quantum experiment. The chances of picking up a gold ball becomes 100% as quantum equations exclude PATHS and there is no path from the GOLD/SILVER box to ever pick a second gold ball.
>>539301320>>539301210>>539301155>>539301252I have highlighted the important part of the problem. I think its just a reading comprehension issue
>>539286052Doing discrete proofs was the most fun I ever had in school. All my discrete professors were fucking hot too.
>>539301354>>539301525The question doesn't say "You pick a box, and your magic hand automatically draws a gold ball to it if there is one". It says you made two random choices and are now holding a gold ball.
>>539301621Yep and AFTER YOU HAVE A GOLD BALL IN YOUR HAND what is the probability the next ball will be gold
>>539301525The first random selection from the box tells you about what the other balls in the box are likely to be. If randomly pick a ball and it’s gold, you got it from the box with 100 trillion gold balls. You didn’t hit a 1/100 trillion chance you just happened to pick the box that has all the gold balls in it. You can infer that with nearly 100% certainty from one picking alone
>>539301447BUT THE QUESTION ISWHAT IS THE CHANCE OF THE 2ND BEEING GOLD.NOT HOW MANY BALLS ARE LEFTso 50% is correct
>>539301447>a 50% chance you picked from 1 of the 2 boxes that could result in another gold ballThe fact that you pulled the first gold ball cannot be ignored at this step. It changes the odds from 1/2 to 2/3.
>>539301697Picking the first ball has no bearing on the problem. See>>539301695
>>539301741It IS ignored because you are figuring the probability AFTER you have drawn the first ball.
>>539301778>Picking the first ball has no bearing on the problem.False.
>>539301730its clearly 50% You have to be a jew golem to thinks its 2/3 Only a nigger tricked by kikes can sit there with a reddit smug look on their face from Midwit Community College and claim its 2/3
>>539301525At this point im fairly certain someone fucked up in explanation of the problem or just rewrote it badly.They completely rephrased it somewhere down the line without thinking compared to OG one which clearly stated its 66% somehow but this new text just doesn't imply that and nobody checked it for 200 yearsIts going to be funny as fuck when it turns out you can make false consensus over any garbage and retards in masse will defend it cause it somewhat makes sense if you ignore some parts of it and le science is backing it up.
>>539301778It does. Because you picked it randomly. Meaning it wasn’t from the box with 1 gold ball and 100 trillion silver balls. It just wasn’t. You can pretty much instantly rule that out
Kek this fucking thread
If I teabag my golden balls on OPs forehead, what is the probability he will suck my cock?Ans: 100% because OP is obviously a faget
>>539285193People say this but fail to really define how it is distinct from the Monty Hall problem. I can only assume you mean where it says "it's a gold ball". If I'm wrong let me know.That's putting a lot of extra meaning on that phrase - it has to mean not only "it's a gold ball", but "it's a gold ball, so discount our previous random choice of box".At the very least, this is not explicit, and you shouldn't exclude other interpretations. You don't usually just discount random choices you made in a probability problem literally just because of the word "it's".Also, how would you phrase it differently to make it equivalent to the Monty Hall problem? Would "it happens to be a gold ball" be sufficient? Could you see how the entire question leading up to this phrase having to do with the probability leading to the selection might lead people to interpret it this way? Does describing HOW something is randomly selected not usually mean that it is randomly selected, regardless of if this is reiterated in every follow-up sentence?
It is a very easy problem. Not sure why you need to write code and run it a billion times. Changing it to a billion balls changes the problem and shows you don't understand it at all.Follow the picture and see if it sinks in.
>>539301840i tried different KI's - and all have the same delusion.i would feel bad for mankind - if i wasn't expecting vogons to solve this once and for all.
>>539301901Its brilliant. I salute OPs bait
>>539301961>Changing it to a billion balls changes the problemIt doesn’t, the math still works exactly the same. Stick to sweeping floors and leave the intellectual work to people with brains
>>539301991i think he just know how stupid people are
>>539301961This is impossible. OP has no balls to place in the boxes. So the problem is poorly formed to begin with.
>>539297798And if you got a gold box on the first go, which box are you more likely to have chosen it from?
>>539301525Smartest guy in the thread
>>539301961>having two possible outcomes means that both of them are equally likelyThat’s not how probability works, anon.
I have a question for the 50/50 anons and I'd like you to answer honestly, please I really want to know. Do you genuinely believe the answer is 50/50 or are you trolling. I know some of you are obviously trolling but others sound very earnest in their belief
>>539302125*gold ball on the first go.
>>539302215what brings YOU to the delusion it isnt?
>>539301525>>539301861Describing how something is randomly selected doesn't usually mean that you have to reiterate that it was randomly selected and the next choice is a part of the same sequence of events in every subsequent sentence.That's not how people usually talk, and that's not how probability problems are usually posed.>>539301695And that gold ball got into your hand using a sequence of random choices that influenced probability. There are 3 gold balls, you don't know which one it is, and the chances it is one over the others are not even.So yes, if you're saying the boxes are equally likely, something in the question has to say or imply that you discount that weighted probability. So where does it say that with full certainty?
>>539302321Are you trolling or not? I genuinely just want to know. I'm not interested in arguing over the answer
>>539302215Nigger how can you have picked a gold ball and still think the probability between picking from the G-G box and the G-S box is 2/3 Yes, 2/3 remaining balls are Gold. 1/3 is silverBut you are asked about the box chosen , ball from the SAME box. The next ball is either silver from the G-S box, or Gold from the G-G box.
>>539302384i am not trolling
This thread again, for the 1000th time. Anyway, I didn't see this image some anon made like a year ago, the 800th time this thread was posted.
>>539302402Not interested in debating, just want to know if you're serious or not.
>>539302428Thank you
>>539302321If, at the start of the game, you draw a gold ball from a random box, what are the chances you drew it from box A and what are the chances you drew it from box B?
After reading through this thread im now convinced that "higher education" is a trap to weed out the actual intelligent people and elevate the Midwest. This is why NASA is able to hire engineers ad infinitum that can create so many theoretical proofs but can't see that there is no space and they're just shooting rockets into the sea.......
>>539302428what sort of experiment would you devise in real life to simulate the problem and get the answer
>>539302449Fuck you Nigger, you blatantly stupid nigger.
>>539284733Monty Hall problem is a prank for statisticians that got out of hand when some prominent theorists believed it and put their name behind it being real. It's like the "you only use 10% of your brain" factoid, just totally fabricated but all over the place.If you perform the experiment with the boxes IRL the odds do not change depending on your door choice obviously.
>>539302542So you're trolling, thank you
>>539301821The problem isn't asking you to pick between two boxes, each with one ball in it. That's not the problem at all.
>>539302215Again, I think its just a reading comprehension issue. I hear when people say probability changes based on previous actions, but that's just not accurate based on how the problem is phrased.
>>539302495That's not the question, though, is it
>>539302599You sound like you're being honest and not trolling, thanks So far trolls: 1 (admitted) at least 2 obvious trolls elsewhere, genuine: 2
>>539302599you stupid fucking nigger The questions isn't "What is the probability of selecting the same color ball after drawing" ^ this is without a doubt 2/3 The question is "Once you have a GOLD BALL what is the chance of the next ball being GOLD"Its 50% Its no wonder the world is run by fucking jews HOLY FUCK NIGGER
>>539302536i don't know.the rules are defnined very strict - the first round doesn't count as the first round is over - then we have only 2 possibilities left - one silver one gold - and both have same possibility.
>>539302402Because there is uncertainty. You don't know which of the gold balls you picked. It's more likely to have come from the box with 100% gold. The choice of ball and the concentration of the balls in each box are inextricably linked.By the way, the 2/3 and 1/3 are not actually about the number of balls. It is the concentration of balls in each box. One box has 100%, the other has 50%. 100/150 is 2/3. Usually people saying 2/3 explain it wrong.So it 100% has to do with which box you picked in the first place. The 50/50 explanation has to exclude our choices in extremely specific ways.
>>539302402You're more likely to be picking from the G-G box
>>539302548With no curtain open you pick 1 of 3. The odds that you have picked the curtain hiding the prize is 1/3/ Monty Hall is not going to open the curtain you picked and is not going to open the curtain hiding the prize. Once he opens one curtain:*what are the odds that the curtain you picked is hiding the prize? 1/3 still*what are the odds that the curtain Monty Hall opened was hiding the prize? 0/3*what's left? The odds that the curtain you did not pick is hiding the prize, which is 2/3.
>>539302701Yes, it is. Because we don't choose another box in step two. We draw from the box that produced the first gold. So the question is, which box are we most likely dealing with when we've already selected a gold from it.
>>539284733>retards will once again insisting they're correct>they will NOT however put their simple assumption to test with actual boxesLow-effort fast version to do at home:>take 6 cards (alternatively, equal pieces of paper)>take two types of cards, three of each type (e.g. 3 Aces and 3 Kings), alternatively do a light pencil mark on three of them (those will be the "Kings") and leave the other 3 blank (those will be the "Aces") >shuffle them all face-down, divide in three sets of two>prepare an empty paper to take notes (or the notepad if your pc/phone: make one column for RELEVANT cases (i.e. you draw King/marked at first draw) and one for POSITIVE outcomes (i.e. you also draw King/marked at the second draw) >let's start!>draw from a random set: >A - if you draw Ace, reshuffle ALL and divide them again. This case must not be counted in either of the two lists.>B1 - if you draw King, add +1 on the RELEVANT cases list, then flip the remaining card on the group>B2 - i you draw King again, add +1 on the POSITIVE cases list this time!>shuffle and repeatAfter reasonably large numbers start to appear, check whether the number of POSITIVE cases resembles more 1/2 or 2/3 the number of RELEVANT cases.There you have it.I'm not instructing you to note down all the Ace/blank outcomes because it's useless, but fell free to try if you have time to waste.Have fun.
>>539302732where is the confidence about the answer coming from if you can't even think of a way to simulate it
>>539302594Correct. The problem states that you have chosen a box randomly and chosen a golden ball out of that box randomly. Now that that is completed and you are holding a golden ball and there is only 1 ball left in the box, What is the probability that the remaining ball in the box you have chosen is gold.
>>539285193>>539290645>>539291066>>539293904>>539293969>>539295907>>539300356>these are the braindead niggers I’ve been destroying in arguments on /pol/Kek no wonder it’s been so easy… I haven’t exactly been going up against somebody with a full deck
>>539302564I hope the 2/3rds crowd are trolling or there is no hope for the next generation.For those that aren't trolling, this isn't a 'choice' problem where you count the possible moves and count the possible wins giving you a probability of success.The 'game' selects the first AND second ball - read that again if you don't get it. If you can't understand that, you don't understand the game. The 'game' pulls the first gold and that sets the BOX. The other two boxes are removed. That is the key to understanding the game, you HAVE to pull from the same box. There is no choice, there is only one box left with one ball in it.The probability is did the game choose the GG or the GS box. That is it.
>>539302429https://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/516336954/#516347391
>>539302872And the answer to that question is 2/3.
>>539302821there is no need to simulate as the question is FROM THE SAME BOXis this so hard to understand?
>>539302884I don't find it funny, I find it sad. They don't even understand it after it's been explained to them, that's why I assume a large number of them are trolling but I'm not sure there's actually the case.
>>539302889I don't believe you are genuine and have zero interest pointlessly debating someone b8ing for (you)s
>>539302726You're calling me a nigger for saying 50% is correct and then you say 50% is correct.... friendly fire>>539302784I think you're confusing yourself. You are holding a golden ball and have one more ball in your box. It's either gold or silver. The box you pulled from doesn't change the probability because we know in advance what combos are in each box: GG GS SS. By holding a gold ball you have a 50% probability of pulling a gold ball from the same box"What is the probability the first ball you picked would be gold" is an entirely different equation
>>539303007Then answer my tranny probability example NIGGER
>>539284733During the benchmark testing they pretend to be “processing” but in reality they are just outsourcing to expert (aka not in India) humans They do the same thing after the fact but outsource it to Indians. You can run the benchmarks yourself and they will perform dramatically worse than during their so called testing.
>>539302912>2+2=5
>>539303061>I have no interest in debating you because you're trolling>THEN DEBATE MENo. This is my last response you you
>>539284733well I already got a gold ball so I'm not playing anymore
>>539302548This is Bertrand's Box, not Monty Hall Problem.And Monty Hall Problem is not a prank. People just have difficulty understanding that Monty revealing a goat gives information on the location of the prize because Monty knows where the prize is. Whatever experiment you performed in real life was most likely flawed because you ignored that key piece of the puzzle.
>>539302955It is literally impossible for people with an IQ below 85 to think in abstract concepts. That “but I didn’t eat breakfast this morning” meme is real. No matter what you say to try and get through to them, they won’t absorb it any better than a chimpanzee learning about astrophysics. They’re missing the part of their brain required to make sense of it.
>>539303050No, I am not confusing myself. When you draw a gold ball on the first go, there is a 2/3s chance you got it from the box with 2 gold and a 1/3 chance you got it from the box with one gold. So when you draw the second time 2/3 of the time you're drawing from the box with another gold, and 1/3 from the box with the silver.
>>539303050>"What is the probability the first ball you picked would be gold" is an entirely different equationThink this is the nuance, but 2/3 niggers are so confident from jewish daycare they refuse to listen to the chosen 50%
>>539303007What don't you understand Britbro, I can explain it super slow if you want. I expect anyone under 30 not to understand, but I had more faith in the British education system.
>>539302889You can lead a faggot to titties but you can't make them suck
>>539303183Brits cant even maths how many white girls are raped by sand nigs down the lane. Fucking useless Jew bread golems.The anglo really is the greatest of the kike golems and deserves to be erased by browns
>>5392847333/3 balls of 3
>>539303162>>539303247>I’ve never studied math in my life and I can’t model the problem with code because I’m a retard, but I just FEEL like all the math and the simulations are incorrect and anyone who disagrees with me just has too much education!
This is how my brain does it. I failed math numerous times and i smoke weed literally every day, but a fraction is a fraction man.... pretty basic shit
>>539303159If you flip a coin heads on the first go, what is the probability you flip heads on the 2nd go?
>>539303162Okay like if you put the ball back its 50/50 i was thinking it was 50/50 but the question never says the ball goes back in the box or that the balls reset
>>539295907>same box>only two boxes had gold>4 minus 1 ball>3 balls in total after>only 2 gold balls left>.....>2/3
>>539303159Not actually why it's 2/3 anon. The first box could have 4 gold balls and it would still be 2/3.It's 2/3 because the first box has 100% gold balls and the second box has 50% gold balls.Because 100% is 2x 50%, it's 2/3.
>>539291262>>539301210>>539301525like with all mathematical "paradoxes" the issue is that it's presented as purely a problem of conventional logic but then a math result is expected i.e. the question is fundamentally flawed and/or it's just a fucking trick questionin logical terms its 50% because the balls in the double gold box are interchangeable and the silver box is not counted because you can't ever draw gold from itin math terms its 2/3 because the balls are considered non-fungible and because the silver box is counted due to mathematical formalities
>>539303457Still wrong you stupid nigger Becuase its 100%, 50% and 0%ITS 50% you absolute fucking NIGGER post your hands, Chinkjeet
>>539303430JUST NO two boxes had goldafter round 1 possible one boxes has gold , possible one box has silver AND EACH TRY WHICH IS FOLLOWING IN THE SIMUALTION - WE HAVE one of the two
2 gold balls 3 silver balls2/3
>>539303372There's no second choice and no second event here. It's just which box have we most likely chosen in the first case? The box with more gold or less? We don't choose the second time.
>>539303457Lol way to prove yourself wrong
>>539303549The boxes are there to distract you they have no bearing on the situation because you cant see in them its like pickinf balls with eyes closed it doesnt matter
>>539303641But the choices you made previously to you holding the first golden ball do not factor in to the probability of you holding a 2nd golden ball
>>539303660Poison in the water supply up north has made many a leaf retarded, pls understand
>>539303773Kek
>>539303744What do you mean, im sorry i actually font get it. Do the boxes reset after you pick the first ball???
>>539303839It means there is no 'choice' in the game. The game pulled a random ball that was GOLD. That means it came from Box A or Box B. Once that was selected, the second ball is set in stone. The rules say it has to come from the same box. There is only one ball sitting in that box ... it is gold or silver 50/50.The 2/3rd crowd think you are choosing between 3 remaining balls, which is crazy talk.
>>539285176>>539285193It's actually 33%In the beginning there are three golden and three silver balls.You take a golden ball out so now three silver balls are left and two golden. Which means 2/3 chance that next ball is silver and 1/3 the next one is golden.
What is the probability you select 1 box, and it is a box where 2 balls match. G+G (match)S+S (match)G+S (do not match)Therefore 2/3 probability you select a box and that box contains matching balls. If I select a box, and observe (the act that interferes with all matter and triggers quantum state) the ball is GOLD Now there is a reduction of the superposition due to the observation. The ball is gold. Only 2 boxes have gold balls. What is the probabilitty the next ball is gold as you have observe you picked a box with a gold ball. Possible outcomes - its silver or its gold (2) 50%.
>>539304031This is exactly it>>539304031We can all now join forces and gang up on this guy
#include <iostream>#include <random>#include <tuple>#include <vector>enum class Ball : unsigned char{ GOLD, SILVER,};int main(){ const std::vector<std::tuple<Ball, Ball>> boxes = { { Ball::GOLD, Ball::GOLD }, { Ball::GOLD, Ball::SILVER }, { Ball::SILVER, Ball::SILVER }, }; const long inters = 10'000'000; long both = 0; long attempt = 0; std::random_device rd; std::mt19937 gen(rd()); std::uniform_int_distribution<int> dist(0, static_cast<int>(boxes.size()) - 1); std::uniform_int_distribution<int> dist2(0, 1); for (long i = 0; i < inters; i++) { const auto r = dist(gen); const auto &[b1, b2] = boxes[r]; const auto first = dist2(gen); const auto u1 = first ? b1 : b2; const auto u2 = !first ? b1 : b2; if (u1 == Ball::GOLD) { attempt++; if (u2 == Ball::GOLD) both++; } } std::cout << ((static_cast<double>(both) / attempt) * 100) << "%\n"; return 0;}i stand corrected...
What happens if you try the experiment irl and the box you select has two silver balls?Well, you ignore that run and start over, because that run doesn't match the given information. Right?What about the other boxes? If you select the box with two gold balls then those results are going to be usable, because you are guaranteed to pull a gold ball and that matches the given information.The gold-silver box, though, half the time that you begin the experiment by selecting that box you will draw a silver ball and have to declare a do-over, because drawing a silver ball does not match the given information.So, say you try this experiment 3000 times.You draw the silver-silver box about 1000 times, and discard those resultsYou draw the gold-gold box about 1000 times and keep those resultsYou draw the gold-silver box about 1000 times, but half of those times you draw a silver ball and discard the results, so you keep 500 of those instancesSo of the 3000 attempts, about 1500 didn't match the given information and are ignored.The other 1500, the results we use, 1000 of them are the gold-gold box, 500 are the gold-silver box
>>539284733It's 50-50. The one with two silvers becomes irrelevant. 2/3 is the reddit midwit answer
>Nobody believes AI is realPlease describe precisely what you mean by "real.">they repurposed the term AI and invented the term AGI for marketing purposes.What are you even talking about? The term AGI was coined around 1997, and if anything, modern post 2017 AI models would qualify as AGI as the term was originally used pre-2017. The only reason no one considers them AGI today is because everytime the models get better and more capable, the goalposts for what qualifies as muh AGI just get pushed back even further.
>>539304271Yeah, the 2/3 faggots dont consider the 0% practical outcome when they claim GO TEST IT URSELF MY NUMBERS IS RIGHT A JEW TOLD METhey are functionally bred to be slaves to KIKESIf you see 50% YOU ARE ARYAN
>>539303549>Becuase its >100%, 50% and 0%Interesting, first time someone has told me it's 50% BECAUSE of the concentration of the boxes, not discounting the concentration of the boxes.How would that equation change if the probability of the boxes changes?I can tell you exactly how it changes my equation:((first box original gold concentration) x (first box remaining gold concentration) + (second box original concentration) x (second box remaining gold concentration) / (first box original gold concentration + second box original gold concentration)>>539303660It's not my fault some people explain the answer incorrectly. I didn't prove MYSELF wrong at all, I've explained it correctly the whole thread. The only way you could conclude that I proved myself wrong is if you lump everyone who gives an answer together even when it's completely nonsensical.
>>539304061>2 gold balls out of 3 >only half the chance same shit
>>539304323use my c++ code. it is 2/3>>539304174 i thought it was 50/50 too.
>>539302936There is clearly a need to simulate this if you look at this thread.
>>5393042711500 would be the total number of runs we keep, but since in 500 of the runs the second ball won't be gold, it's 1000/1500, or 2/3.
>>539304359it shows 66% - and is still wrong
>>539304547what is wrong about it
>>539304505That's what he said.
>>539284733The answer is 50%, and it can be supported logically:You have a box that is missing a ball. So 1 slot of the box is missing. That means you can only have 1 slot remaining from each of the choices. That leaves you with 50%.The support comes from looking at the larger system. You have 2 boxes as possible choices. Pick one at total random as a guess. That is 50/50 and aligns with the previous way of looking at it. I suspect both answers, 1/2 and 2/3, are probably correct in the sense that the answer depends how you view the system involved. Therefore, both answers are probably "correct" ... which one is to you depends on how you're looking at it. I presume that is why this question keeps being brought up, is considered a "paradox" by academics (who just follow whatever an authority claims is correct), etc
>>539304581My bad
>>539304573the formula.it doesnt take the "we've took from the first box already one ball"Python 3.13.5 (tags/v3.13.5:6cb20a2, Jun 11 2025, 16:15:46) [MSC v.1943 64 bit (AMD64)] on win32Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.>>> import random...... def main():... boxes = [... ("GOLD", "GOLD"),... ("GOLD", "SILVER"),... ("SILVER", "SILVER"),... ]... iters = 10_000_000... both = 0... attempt = 0... for _ in range(iters):... b1, b2 = random.choice(boxes)... first = random.randint(0, 1)... u1 = b1 if first else b2... u2 = b2 if first else b1... if u1 == "GOLD":... attempt += 1... if u2 == "GOLD":... both += 1... print(f"{(both / attempt) * 100}%")...... if __name__ == "__main__":... main()...66.66808696123576%>>>as long you are cheating on the formula you'll get the result you want
>>5393016952/3, because under the same principle as >>539301210 it is more likely that the gold-ball-first happened in the first box.
>>539304440There is nothing to simulate Ruskibro. That would imply the "game player" is choosing anything. The game chose one ball which was GOLD, that means 2 of the 3 boxes are gone once the choice was made. There is one box left that the gold came out of and one ball left in that box. The colour of the ball tells us if the game chose Box A or Box B. There is no input from the user to simulate. If we have a second gold it is considered a 'win', if we have a silver it is considered a loss. One winning condition with two possible outcomes is 50% probability of pulling a second gold.
>>539304775First ball is meaningless and does not factor into the equation
>>539304782>The game choseActually it says "YOU pick box [sic] at random" and "YOU put your hand in and take a ball". Can you show us where in the question text it says to disregard previous information that we made these choices and why you're so certain it says that?
>>539304782You can simulate any problem and the division in opinions (and I know 99% of you are just trolling) demonstrates that it is necessary.
I want the Dinosaur.
>>539305053You are defining problem badly and getting bad results, constantly and its not making 2/3 correct.You just dont know to code codemonkeys
>>539304623you are wrong When i play pretend and imagine I did this 300 times in my head it is 2/3 A jew told me I am right
>>539304985Half of the results get thrown out because of the first ball, so no, it isn't meaningless. It's the reason that one box has usable results 100% of the time and the others do not
>>539286052I don't understand the argument "AI can't do anything new; it can only repeat what it was trained" as if it's a bad thing. Most people's jobs are 99-100% repeated activities. Even jobs that at first glance seem novel end up using familiar approaches to problem solving. If AI is only ever good at doing what's been done before that's still good enough to do the vast majority of jobs.
>>539305049I mean the game tells you that "you chose GOLD". Your first choice isn't GOLD or SILVER, it is set by the game. That also sets the box, either A or B because you got a GOLD. You then have to pick from the same box as the game chose. The text says "YOU PICK", but you really have no choice in the matter.
>>539284733>mathematiciansIt's clearly a portal to demons. They aren't physically here.. yet
>>539305187what sort of experiment would you devise in real life to simulate the problem and get the answer
>>539293904If you put a loaded gun to your head and pull the trigger, I will give you $10 million should the gun misfire and you survive. Afterall, there's a 50/50 chance you live since it'll either misfire or it won't.
>>539305496Step one Remove gold ball from box1 and box2Step twoPick a box
>>539305304Be smarter. Please.What im saying, you daft faggot, is the first ball exists in your hand. It's gold. Only then do you factor the probability of the remaining ball in that box, you stupid fucking half nigger. If you're factoring probabilities before you have the first golden ball in your hand, you're doing it wrong because you lack reading comprehension, you darkest of africanoid simpletons.So with a golden ball in your paw, what is the probability that the 2nd ball you yank out of the SAME box is gold?Posting the original problem with highlights for the clinically inept
>>539305406What a weird thing to try and argue. This has to be a troll.
>>539305406I still don't see how "you pick X at random. you pick a Y from an X at random. it's a Z Y" implies that Z is not random, or at the very least how you can be so CERTAIN that's what it's trying to tell you when it never says explicitly, "disregard your random choice, the number of Z Ys in Xs is the only thing that matters".That's not how people talk. If I said "I just picked a random fruit barrel. Then I picked a random fruit from that barrel. It was an apple", would you not assume I randomly picked the apple? If not, fair enough, I'm just trying to understand why you're so certain.
>>539305496Coin flip would do. We know we got a GOLD on first ball. Is it box A or box B. Box C has no GOLD balls, so it is not an option. If you want to simulate it so badly, do a coin flip game and report back when you get 50%.
>>539305660As leader of the 50% contingency we do not claim Ukraine-anon
>>539295792Is it L8?
>>539305791It's 2/3. Been simulated so many times. The fact that you're highlighting this, which proves the exact opposite point to the one you're trying to make is hilarious.
>>539305867The problem says that you have to pick a box at random and a ball in that box at random. Your simulation is getting an answer to a different problem.
>>539305917>Been simulated many timesK, got it, im arguing with retards. That's my fault
>>539305867>Coin flip would do. We know we got a GOLD on first ball. Is it box A or box B. Box C has no GOLD balls, so it is not an option.>If you want to simulate it so badly, do a coin flip game and report back when you get 50%.lol, this is getting so stupid it hurts.
>>539306016Not my fault you don't understand. Go make the boxes since you're too stupid to run some simple power shell commands.
>>539305791Aaaatchuly, if I have my golden balls existing in my hand and THEN reach into her box to pull out, its unlikely I have any balls left in that other hand unless it another mans balls because shes obviously being double teamed by both me and my wifes son.
[code]import lists as Lfun rmv(l, ball): # remove the ball cases (List) l: | empty => empty | link(f,r) => if (f == ball): r else: link(f, empty) end endend# boxes GG = [list: "G", "G"]GS = [list: "G", "S"]SS = [list: "S", "S"]All = [list: GG, GS, SS] fun sim(i): # randomize list, get first box box = L.shuffle(i).first # randomize box, get first ball ball = L.shuffle(box).first # remove ball from the box remain = rmv(box, ball) if (ball == remain.first): 1 else: 0 endendfun test(n): if (n > 0): sim(All) + test(n - 1) else: 0 endendtest(100)test(1000)test(10000)[/code]I wrote retard proof code to simulate.Run it here yourself https://code.pyret.org/editorResults:706546630notice it converging to 2/3 and not 1/2
>>539305791Probability questions aren't asked in a way where you're expected to disregard all previous information once the question is asked (and certainly not in such a specific way implicitly - ignore all explicit random choices and count the number of boxes with gold in them only).Even ignoring that last bit, I'll concede if you can find a single probability problem online where the correct answer is one that can only be reached if you disregard all random choices before a question poised at the end that does not explicitly tell you to discount all of your random choices.
Are the golden balls my wifes sons balls.
>>5393057912/3Because for you to have a gold ball in your paw it's twice as likely that you began by selecting the box with two gold balls.
>>539305824The text says "you pick ball at random", but the game says you got a GOLD ball. I was explaining you didn't pick at random or you could have pulled a silver or gold. "You picked a GOLD ball" may as well be part of the game instructions. This is why the dopes say 2/3rd. One gold selected 2 golds left out of 3 balls. They don't understand you have to select out of the same box that the game chose to start with. The real question is, the game is going to select Box A or Box B with the gold in it. What is the probability the game selected Box A from those two choices.
>>539306111This is so simple that I think anyone that can type a sentence should understand. But there are still a bunch of midwife here dying on the 2/3s hill and I dont think its trolling. So I have to believe its lack of understanding the question. Maybe there is another problem out there where factoring the first ball is part of the probability equation, but in OPs post, it is irrelevant. So its either complete lack of understanding or you have actually been taught wrong, which is hilarious>we trained him wrong on purpose.... as a joke
>>539306206Ok so ask the question less stupidly. It's not my fault im reading it correctly
>>539305964It says that, but also confirms it was the GOLD ball selected. The first ball therefore can't be SILVER, correct?If it is a GOLD ball then it is box A or box B. Flip a coin. You can't see in the box, so it is a random choice.
>>539306371These must be schrodingers balls. How else can three women receive the one mans balls simultaneously WHILE his balls are both gold and silver in multipke states.
>>539306453>It says that, but also confirms it was the GOLD ball selected. The first ball therefore can't be SILVER, correct?No, that is not correct. You picked a box at random so it could have been silver; just happened to be gold. Fail random pick as required by the problem's description can also produce silver ball as the first pick. If in your simulation does not produce silver balls as first pick ever,then you are simulating a different problem.
>>539306334How normal people think "I picked a ball at random, and it happened to be gold. Therefore, the answer is 2/3"How your 70 iq brain thinks"The game has magically forced to to draw a gold ball therefore I will just shut off my brain and say it's 50 50 because the pixies and unicorns of THE GAME have deemed it so"
>>539306409"Correctly" - anon, it's not just probability problems either. Generally when people say things, one sentence leads into another, they are not unrelated. They are often sequences of events.The only exception is potentially riddles or word play. If you believe it's a riddle or word play, okay. The thing I don't understand is how people who say 50/50 can be SO CERTAIN about it. Simple words like "it's" or the placement of the question at the end are taken to have huge implications for how the problem is to be interpreted, and you just have zero belief that anyone could interpret these at best obfuscated cues any other way, including taking it literally and the way sentences and problems are usually meant to be interpreted.
