Rayman Pirate-Community

3 hours, 44 minutes to go for <. Lonely is much better, together. But that's not the case for <.

Ray502 wrote:< hopes there won't be a hangover effect tomorrow to where the activity is dead.

< thinks it can't be worse than the 2017 average so far.

Ambidextroid wrote:Ah, < had always heard it as an infinite amount of monkeys.

Well, as I showed the proof can be extended to an infinite amout of monkeys, but the basic theorem is more ‘powerful’ since it shows only one is required. Maybe the name got you confused, as it seems to be called infinite monkey theorem.

Ambidextroid wrote:Whoops, < may have gotten "proportional" wrong.
Still, what I was trying to say is that adding more monkeys to a room for a set time increases the probability that they'll type any specific string. Leaving one money for an hour with a typewriter is probably not going to get you any words, but if you leave a million you're much more likely. < probably didn't mean to say proportional, < meant that as the number of monkeys approach infinity, the probability of any specific string appearing approaches one.

Well, if you're talking about a set amount of time, it's a whole different story. The theorem only applies to an infinite amount of time and is useless here. Let's say the probability of one monkey typing a given string S in a time T is p > 0 (it wouldn't be too hard to calculate from S, T, the possible keys and the monkey's typing speed—we're obviously ruling out strings too long to be typed in a time T in this example as p would be 0). Then the probability that among n monkeys, at least one would type S in T is Pn = 1 - (1 - p)n. One can see that this Pn increases with n, therefore what you just said is true (but not what you said earlier): the more monkeys, the more likely. For an infinite amount of monkeys, the probability is even limn->+∞ Pn = 1, i.e. they will almost certainly produce S in T.

Your problem here is that you're mixing lots of different things and using them interchangeably in your reasoning. Whether it's one or several or an infinity of monkeys, a finite or infinite string, a finite or infinite amount of time will often yield completely different results and you can't just swap one for another.

Ambidextroid wrote:What < meant by paradox is that a probability of 1 would usually mean guaranteed (for example, what's the probability of flipping heads with a coin that has two heads) but at the same time as demonstrated here, a probability of 1 could mean "almost certain" with a possibility of failure.

Maybe mathematically that's not paradoxical but it seemed to < to be somewhat contradictory, that a mathematical probability of 100% could fail.

Well, just think of probability as a mathematical construction. It is defined as such, because it's the best way we've found to measure likelihood, however counter-intuitive it may be.

To illustrate the problem, think about picking a real number at random between 0 and 1. There's an infinity of possible results, yet each of them will have a probability of 0. What else could it be?

Ambidextroid wrote:And sorry about not addressing the maths you used, < isn't familiar with the details and the notation. < has a habit of forming conclusions about things in <'s head that < hasn't learned about so as a result < articulates <'s self really poorly even to <'s self

I strongly suggest you try reading it again, there's virtually no knowledge of any notations whatsoever required, other than that P(E) means ‘probability that E occurs’.

Disclaimer: I haven't done maths in ten years, hopefully I didn't say anything stupid.

< is trying to work hard before laying down to bed.
< wonders if Sunday is the right time to ask <'s crush out. < is a little more passive, < might want to wait til < can talk more to her.

< says ^ should go ask on tuesday

< only gets to see her on Sunday. To ask over text, is not the best option.

< can confirm it is disaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawaaaaaastrous over text.

I mean, back then, as late as the early 2000s, you still have had to call her or just physically ask her out. Times surely have changed, < misses the time in 04 and 05 when < had no school at all.

Going back to earlier, < wonders if ^ feels any better?

Heh, <'s still able to do clapping push ups, awesome.

Both of <'s first and second period teachers are away ill so < gets to lounge at home
< hopes they're ok though, one of them's been away for a week now

< has been feeling great so far, ^^^. Was able to eat cereal and drink a Pepsi today.

incognito wrote:< can confirm it is disaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawaaaaaastrous over text.

< says it will most likely be disastrous if you explicitly ask. It has to happen naturally.

Looks like we're maintaining momentum, today's the second most active RPC's been this year, behind yesterday, < sees.

Great. So far, no hangover effect.

Hmm, <'s been jinxed before, so < better not say it again.

< would be tempted to take 4 Xanaxes now.
< doesn't take that shit, but has a box full of them.

Master wrote:Looks like we're maintaining momentum, today's the second most active RPC's been this year, behind yesterday, < sees.

< thinks it's pretty good, given that it's not even the evening yet.

Indeed, a nice change of pace given how quiet it's been thus far.

<'s working on the expanded portion of <'s report.

< should turn his PiP Boy on. The situation will soon need it.

< wants to tinker about with LCDs again, <'s always used libraries when <'s used them in the past, < wants to learn a little more about drawing objects on them.

< feels like <'s lost a considerable amount of flexibility ever since <'s been homeschooling. < needs to start finding some exercises that can improve it.