Is having problems with trivial probability problems indicative of low IQ? or is probability abstract enough that it is something that is learnt, rather than intuited?
>>16785157Fun Fact: Today is the Anniversary of tue Birthday Problem.
>>16785157Being filtered by the yellow balls is actually a midwit problem. Low IQ are either too confused to engage with the problem at all, or they grasp it solely in terms of established statistical concepts (when trained to simply apply the relevant rules and memorize standard explanations). Mid IQs try to grasp the actual substance of it, but their mathematical abilities fall short of their eagerness to go down epistemological and ontological rabitholes, so they come up with insane theories for why basic Probability Theory is wrong.High IQs grasp how the formalism relates to various epistemological and ontological ideas.
>>16785166Ultra high IQ: 50% - it either happens or it doesn't.
>>16785172like the Powerball lottery huh
>>16785172No, that's this version.
There are 3 boxes. Each box has a hole for your balls. One box has a hole big enough for one ball. Another box has a hole big enough for both balls. The final box has a hole big enough to fit balls and shaft.What is the probability that you use it for your own pleasure?
>>16785157The worst form of retard is the one that goes "this is like the monty hall problem" and draws any conclusion from that
>>16785166this has little to do with IQit has to do with whether you studied probability or notif you have 200 IQ and never did math you ain't solving shit, but a midwit who studied hard can easily solve it
>>16785299> a midwit who studied hard can easily solve itMy post (tailored to be midwit-friendly) went completely over your head, probably because you're in the first category I described.
>>16785303ah got ityou are one of the idiots who gets filtered by this problemand thinks he is smarter than everyone elseyou are not even a midwityou are average and suffer from classic Dunning-Krugertextbook case
>>16785307Nevermind being low IQ, you sound literally mentally ill...
>>16785157This image sets you up for failure. You imagine drawing from the balls in an ordered left-to-right fashion so you think about it in terms of boxes instead of GGS
>>16785157For basic problems like this one it's just pattern recognition. If you didn't have enough exposure to the solving process it will look hard as hell. Just look at the history of statistics and you will see geniuses like Newton making "basic" erros and sweating buckets to solve things that now days a midwit solves in 2 min
>>1678515733% right? bayes rule
>>16785157Depends whether you choose to take the gold ball or the silver ball, in the event you find your hand in the mixed box. So either 1 or 1/2.
>>16785333>This image sets you up for failure. You imagine drawing from the balls in an ordered left-to-right fashion so you think about it in terms of boxes instead of GGSWhat are you talking about? If you shove your hand into the middle box, half of the time you'll end up touching a cold grey ball, so that box would account for half as many cases of touching yellow balls.
>>16785157Uh? It's obviously 50%
>>16785178This one is also 50% obviously. I mean duh, if you have 50% chance of drawing a gold you also have 50% chance of drawing a silver since it's the only alternative.
Sincerely, I was professionally tested for FSIQ and got a 126 when I was exhausted on no sleep and brain fogged from SSRI misuse. I probably have a low 130s g score so why is this aggravating me like this? Should it be easy?>"it's a gold ball" means that box #3 is fucking impossible and not worth factoring in, it's a straightforward constraint regardless of order>the other ball of the same box is either the other gold ball in box #1 or it's the silver one in box #2How is it not 50%? Am I meant to take the order of constraints into account, pretending that box #3 is not going to be flatly excluded? If you pretend the impossible choices matter, the two random choices are identical to one random choice of one ball. None of them are more likely to be the first draw than any other before it's revealed to be gold. There's only one gold ball that has silver coming after. How is not 1/6 or 50%? How could it be anything else?
>>16785432Wait I guess it could also be 1/3 but whatever. When I googled it, it said 2/3.
>>16785432I was baffled at how anyone could get anything other than 50% too, so I tried feeding the question to LLMs, which all concluded that it must be 2/3 of drawing gold or 1/3 silver. This is because they tried calculating with the probability of picking the box initially/drawing the initial gold ball, even though it's a done deal. Presumably that's what trips most people too.I blame the picture honestly, it'd be much clearer if it actually presented the state you're drawing the second ball from.
>>16785432>I was professionally tested for FSIQ and got a 126>How is it not 50%?See >>16785166 and >>16785406
There are two boxes, one containing a gold ball and one containing a silver ball. To test out that there's no finger-biting monster or something, you quickly put your hand in and pull it back without drawing any ball, on purpose. What are the odds of drawing a gold ball if you draw from the box you just put your hand in?
>>167851782/3
>>167851571/3
>>16785438>even though it's a done deal.Nope. You're just retarded. Sorry.
It's obviously 100% or 0%. If you picked the golden ball from the box with both colours, it's 100% and if you picked the golden ball from the box with only gold it's 0%
There are three cases in which you picked a gold ball. In the first two cases, you then pick another gold ball. In the third case, you then pick a silver ball. Therefore, the probability that the next ball is silver is 1/3.
>>16785545There's only 2 cases in which you picked a gold ball, nerd. Either you got box GG or box GS.
>>16785543You are conditioning on a specific box, while the problem asks for the probability irrespective of the box picked.
>>16785547The boxes themselves do not affect the probability of picking a specific ball. You can construct a tree with three branches for the three boxes, each probability 1/3. You can then add two branches for each ball, each probability 1/2. You will see that picking each ball is equally likely with probability 1/6.
>>16785543Yes... and now you multiply those by the probabilities of your ball having come from the respective box. You've made it 95% of the way to the finish line. Don't give up now.
There are two dice. One is a trick die that rolls only 6s, the other is a regular, fair die.You pick a die at random and roll a 6. What are the odds that you roll another 6 with the same die?
>>167855537/12
>>16785553Your Heil Hitler % propaganda is suspect, sir.
>>16785553There are 7 cases where you rolled a 6. 6 of those cases from the trick die and 1 comes from the regular die. 6/7*1+(1/7)*(1/6)=37/42=~88.1%
>>16785554Observe that the probability of rolling a GIVEN a certain die is different. Why should you assume the two die are equally likely upon observing a 6? For example, if you observed a 4, what are the cases for each die?
>>16785558Yeah I realized I was retarded when I made that post and couldn't be fucked to correct it.
>>16785554If it helps, imagine you didn't just roll one 6 with the die you picked, you rolled 6s a hundred times in a row. Now what's the probability that you will roll a 6 with the same die next? Surely it's not a mere 700/1200
Here is a better filter question.You and your opponent each draw a decimal number between 0 and 1 without revealing it. You each have the option to redraw and keep that value instead, and the other person doesn't know which choice they made. The person with the higher number wins. Find the optimal strategy.
>>16785571I'm too lazy to calculate the exact threshold for redrawing, but it's probably significantly lower than 0.5 because the opponent is going to redraw low numbers too.
>>16785577>significantly lower than 0.5significantly higher, fuck me
>>16785365>33% right? bayes ruleyes. if you picked a gold ball first, there was a 2/3rds chance that it came from the box with two gold balls. the next ball picked from that box must be gold. The other 1/3rd of the time, you picked from the box of mixed balls, so you'd end up getting the silver ball.
>>16785513You're selecting for a gold ball, it's not 2/3, dipshit.
>>16785698There's a 2/3 chance of hitting the win condition (box number 1) when randomly selecting a gold ball due to the fact that 2/3rds of the gold balls are in box number 1 (the win condition). Explain, in detail and without glossing over anything, how my thought process is wrong.
