Wizards of Odds: The Power of Probability

[@WorldScienceFestival]

Hello, KZbinrs. The World Science Festival is looking for enthusiastic translation ambassadors for its KZbin translation project. To get started, all you need is a Google account. Check out Wizards of Odds: The Power of Probability to see how the process works: kzbin.info_video?v=92A5iDjxgOg&ref=share To create your translation, just type along with the video and save when done. Check out the full list of programs that you can contribute to here: kzbin.info_cs_panel?c=UCShHFwKyhcDo3g7hr4f1R8A&tab=2 The World Science Festival strives to cultivate a general public that's informed and awed by science. Thanks to your contributions, we can continue to share the wonder of scientific discoveries with the world.

[@mfanto1]

Why don't you hire more diverse people that can do it for you. Just because one has a vagina and have some colour doesn't say anything about your ability

[@fredkruse1748]

9

[@luissousa5123]

What a sheet

[@catthegipsy25]

Wouldn't the effort be better spent teaching people some common language, English or not, so we get the benefit in the future too. Instead of looking for translators every time something new comes up.

[@jaynestag95]

World population 7.8 billion covid 19 deaths 5.30 million ( you have a 1 in 1,560 of dying)

[@Verschlungen]

What a treat to see Mlodinow in person! I bought his book, The Drunkard's Walk, in 2013 and ten years later still refer to it frequently. I love it. However, consider how he frames the Monty Hall problem there: "[U]nderstanding the Monty Hall problem requires no mathematical training. But it does require some careful logical thought" (p. 53). Stated slightly differently, what this means is that Monty Hall is really concerned with thinking like a programmer [or like a 'coder' as the kids would have it nowadays?], which means asking questions such as: "Where is the user now in the notional state machine?" The amount of probability per se is quite minimal in this (and many kindred) "probability" problems, which are often more like ivory tower parlor games.

[@Colhogan06]

I think when it comes to luck and "lucky" people, there are instances where we create our own luck, so to speak. I used to sell cars a long time ago. The other salespeople used to always say I was lucky. In fact what it was, was I was willing to talk to people other's were not. Yes in many cases I knew the person couldn't buy right then. But I would do my thing and then just keep them in my bank of possibilities. Later on it always seemed that when I needed a sale the most, one of those "banked" people would come on the lot looking for me and would end up buying a car. It was only because I was willing to talk with them a month or two earlier and they had my card and remembered I was nice to them. The others would bypass people who they felt would not or could not buy immediately because they felt it was wasting valuable selling time. I felt investing in possibilities never hurt and sometimes when I needed them the most, they showed up and made my day. This was basically luck, but luck I created.

[@leolima75]

But what you're not taking into account are the so many other lucky intances that might have influenced your results: appearance (genetic lotery), educational background etc. So that, supposing all other salespeople were your identical twins and had exactly the same life experiencies and so on, then maybe your approach could be deemed the only success factor at play. But then maybe the others would have behaved the same way as you did hehe

[@rokyericksonroks]

What are they odds the person even bothering to shop around WILL eventually be a buyer? Probably pretty good and you were getting a sales lead by approaching them. Overlooking them for someone who might be more ready to purchase sooner sounds like Bayes tteorem. T-y for your service.

[@markhammer9975]

Good call. I got my recent good job because I decided to do my best at my last job. I thought maybe someone from this job I have now would notice me, and they did. Seriously. I liked your idea of creating your own luck.

[@curtcoller3632]

It comes down to who is willing to "listen". I once entered a dealership with ONE clear and simple wish: I want THIS car and PAY cash. Oh - part of the rebate is only for military veterans. It was the new car in front of the entrance with a singificant rebate. And I assumed to be done in 10 minutes. First they wasted my time by showing used cars and not listening to repeated NOs. My nose told me: WATCH: All you need is your title document!!! I was "invited" to sign multiple pages - turned out to be a "credit agreement" with no such indication in the headline. "Oh no it's not a credit agreement, we just use this form for all transactions", said the manager. Third, they refused to give me my title document (clearly I was not the owner). I told them go fuck yourself. Then they woke up and returned part of my money. See what I mean with listening? To tease me further they refused to provide the title and sent ME to DMV!!! DMV still had it as credit purchase, nobody called to change that. That's when I got really angry. You may understand I'm not happy with car sales persons. Finally I learned why they do that: The salesman gets a higher commission if it's NOT a cash sale. I am sure you know that - it's part of each salesman training. Want to know where: DODGE, JEEP, CHRYSLER on CORTEZ BLVD., Weeky Wachee, FL. I created my "luck" in life by making people follow my instructions, especially when I am the one who pays. So you are right, people create their own luck - they get fired.

[@RandysFiftySevenChevy]

I'd rather be lucky than good

[@tedl7538]

John Hockenberry is my favorite moderator in this series....smart, likable and an excellent listener. He guides the conversations in a really productive and satisfying manner, and has a good sense of humor. Thanks John!

[@Jacob-ye7gu]

calling a test "99.9% accurate" has a definition that is dependent on the population. the chance of the test being correct is different given underlying positivity (sensitivity) or negativity (specificity). You can take a weighted average of these values for a given population to determine the "accuracy." But I think an incorrect assumption from "99.9% accuracy" is that the test has a 99.9% chance of being correct whether or not you have the disease, which of course it isn't.

[@goerizal1]

the positive impact these programs give to the general public would be much more if precise english subtitles can also be provided for obvious reasons.

[@bentleybogle9171]

Also some Chinese languages.

[@ChillHous1979]

I understand him pretty well... The purple shirt guy.

[@johnanderson9619]

Things are determined, and it's because of this that we see something we like to call probability

[@Niwan8]

How would you know and prove this thesis

[@shera4211]

Thanks for the great panel and the great discussions! Dr. Peters talked about reducing the uncertainty of an autonomous agent regarding its environment by iteratively moving and adapting the prior belief based on the actions taken and the new sensory data. As I heard this perspective, it occurred to me that one could say the uncertainty distribution is like a complicated wave function getting narrower (asymptotically approaching a collapsed state) by the agent’s interactions with the environment, just as it does in quantum mechanics. Could this make sense? Is this idea discussed anywhere? Any feedback is appreciated.

[@sjmryu6144]

In terms of quantum mechanics and quantum physics, one thing to keep in mind is that the observer changes the observation by the act of observing the observation. So with that in mind, to collapse a waveform as he described, via the numerous variables that are in play at the time, the observers biased theories influence the outcome and so collapsing might not be the most natural outcome for such things as we expect the waveform to collapse due to prior understanding thru prior observations. Its a constant state of mind over matter in a sense because that is how we observe the results. We create the results thru observing the outcome.

[@glenn-younger]

Thank you so much for providing still another lens through which we can view our world. I appreciate the work you do to bring science to the lay-nerds such as myself. :-)

[@LLO227]

The first speaker 🔊 definitely needs a equalizer to transmit his correct frequency of communication.

[@alala512]

For Dengue fever the correct result is 999/10998 because the test is wrong in the other direction too (with the same probability) when someone is sick and the test says that he is healthy. Though the difference is tiny.

[@moestietabarnak]

About the Monthy hall problem; I always think a good demonstration would be to do it with 100 door, select one, then monthy open 98 .. do you switch ?

[@Jacob-ye7gu]

yup, the fact he has to avoid the incorrect one means he's inserting information in your favor into the problem, so it can't possibly be an equal choice after that

[@TheOn3LeftBehind]

Hasoud seems sort of miserable when people start clapping D: He's like, "Yeah, clap for me, peasants." John is amazing, though. He has such a strong, uplifting presence.

[@curtcoller3632]

Yes he does! But his theory is wrong.

[@curtcoller3632]

Sorry - JOHN is the host - he is right to suspect a "trick". The trick is the FOUR BOXES BB BG GB GG. There can be only three or six. Sorry again - I thought you are talking about the second panel member!

[@E-Kat]

He says, “Yeah…” So many foreign people don’t know what “he’s like, she’s like, he goes, she went, I was like etc “ when it’s quicker to say : he said. Don’t be like : there’s nothing wrong with going like that, because I will go: try to put it to the google translate from English to any other language and the computer will go: and I walked yeah….

[@jamescarlisle3770]

Mlodinow's presentation helps to stop me from going to sleep.

[@Sharki91]

I understand the probability of a sequence occurring. For example with a single die the sequence 5-6 is 1/6 x 1/6. But what is the probability of the 6 FOLLOWING the 5 AGAIN the NEXT time a 5 is rolled? For example 5-6-2-1-3-1-4-3--2-5-6… In other words, what is the probability of 6 following 5 two times in a row? Three times in a row? Four times in a row? With other random numbers rolled in between? Thanks.

[@D0ugh.B0y]

The question about breast cancer regarding “the truth” or accuracy of that statistic and more so the answer of the guest about whether or not it is good of effective to be that vague about that statistic reminded me of a book that Bill Gates had once recommended as a “must read” called How To Lie With Statistics by Darrell Huff. This guest basically said it’s ok and even good to “lie with statistics if it gets people to move in a good direction. A direction good for who? Especially when any info can be manipulated to achieve whatever outcome desired by the people divulging that information. Unreal!!!

[@DavidHRyall]

Love to see conditional probability applied to covid - I suspect there are either vastly more or vastly less cases

[@billderinbaja3883]

Virology is all about probability. Educate thyself.

[@theowenssailingdiary5239]

@@billderinbaja3883 relative risk vs absolute risk. Everything is being justified on relative risk it seems.. He has a point.

[@toby9999]

Vastly more cases and vastly more deaths than we know about.

[@sebastianwrites]

I'm far from convinced the stats example at the beginning of this programme is right. I'll come back to this if I have time, but it looks to me as if they mixing up, and conflating different parts of the stats to arrive at the wrong conclusion.

[@garethodonnell1567]

I have been an undercover wizard for along time. I have theories tha can change the world. They used me. Programmed as a test subject but wasn't allowed to know but then became aware n started to dig. Research understand and study everything now I can't turn off this remote viewing. I have amassed data n input for along time. I'm remote viewing the future

[@ladyfame1430]

Cool!

[@matildamarmaduke1096]

@@ladyfame1430 Exactly my first thought go figure

[@matildamarmaduke1096]

Kool

[@Really658]

Alrighty.

[@rickneibauer1]

Is the future set in stone or can we change it?

[@labworx]

I love this channel... thanks guys.

[@ladyfame1430]

So is probability dependable? Or it can change at anytime?

[@brainstormingsharing1309]

Absolutely well done and definitely keep it up!!! 👍👍👍👍👍

[@HIS_VF]

Great presentation, very fun and informative, made the viewing experience enjoyable

[@robinpower6061]

Awesome use of a "might not be dead, but in a cryo chamber, somewhere..." Frodingrer Frozen Cat... In decision making, I get the feeling that, based on probability. you Gentlemen, might trust a computer more than a person. The thought that our Courts might be run by cyber Judges is quite horrific..... Thank you for being so awesomely intuitive (lol) and taking an hour to share your thoughts with us!!!

[@doncooper4729]

I see it like this. She picked door three which has a 1/3 chance of being right. Doors one and two have a collective probability of winning of 2/3. So it's better to switch to door one which has a collective probability of 2/3 of winning.

[@jandroid33]

35:00 About the probability of a girl named Florida: it seems weird because it's easy to interpret it as "we've picked out a family with at least one girl, and oh by the way the girls name is ". That would be the same as the first problem (1/3). The second problem is the same as "we've picked out a family that has a girl named Florida". And this as they explain is 1/2.

[@darksoul479]

Driverless cars don't scare me at all. It's when people are driving the cars that it scares me.

[@ondersfreedom6094]

Great film thank you. Interesting regards the testing pattern. Those who think they're sharper than everyone else, make of that you will.

[@CatmanFS]

"how much they know to rip you off" earned a like

[@jaylev85]

Are electrons and other elementry particals truly in a "super position" or are they just moving so fast that we can't determine the actual position because it is beyond our ability to measure. The slit experiment proves this super position? The action of measurement altered the outcome, but what causal event actually interacted with the particals? What the instrument emiting photons?

[@TheChurchofCacti]

What if you did the douvle split experiment but made the walls form the splits sensors. Because a wave should be hitting the walls/sensors and going through the slit. Also what if instead of firing electrons, you just released them into a box where all 4 walls are sensors

[@jaylev85]

I disagree that ones chances of winning are higher for switching in the monty hall game theory. Regardless of the first event, the outcome is causal and not done at random therefore it can not be treated as an informed observation. If you choose the prize, the door revealed makes no difference, but if you did not choose the prize, the door revealed must be the Prize not. This choice is by design (100% prob) 33% of the time and random choice of remaining doors (50% prob) 67% of the time. So the product of both combined events (event_A x event _B|event_A = 2/3) is equal regardles of the initial choice. The bayesian posterior prob is 50%..2/3 / Sum (2/3,2/3). The contestants choice given event A is not informed because we don't know what path of logic the initial decision follows. The probability from contestants perception is equal. The game becomes an equal odds probability event the moment the second choice is introduced regardless if the initial choice made. Unless we are saying that the host has truly chosen a door at random. A white noise process. If that's the case, I've proven why the odds would infact be greater.

[@gustatrillo-paxosGTP]

really enjoyed that, thanks

[@acnudus]

i must admit that i got lost in most of the practical demonstrations here, but i believe in science and i pray it's probably true :)

[@doodelay]

One does not "pray" that science is true. One questions and tests what he is uncertain of :)

[@MsJisuh]

hahahaha

[@stephenkamenar]

wtf did i just read????

[@j-r-m7775]

@@doodelay One apparently does not get a joke.

[@byronv823]

@@j-r-m7775 but whats the probability that he does get the joke? A million variables at play.. hehe

[@Rwaspora]

Appreciate the honesty on 0:59 😅

[@lucytanss4787]

Excellent

[@DanishGSM]

Thanks from Denmark

[@paolatarouco]

I love that John addressed the fact that there are no women in the group. I envy the next generation that will be sitting in their sofa, just like me, watching an episode of this amazing program but they will be listening to women as well talking about probability.

[@toby9999]

Why does gender matter? It doesn't. No one should care about gender, color, weight, height, age or any other irrelevant personality trait... just the facts.

[@samuelcardenas3123]

witj what precision is a dice rolled and used for before u can find out the eqxact probwbility of landing it as you desire

[@erikziak1249]

Great video, one of the best so far on this channel. 52:53 Exactly! Epigenetics might well have a higher impact than some statistical number based on markers. All the things mentioned will make an exact prediction impossible. What we can hope for is a mere restriction in the probabilistically determined range. The last five minutes or so were very good and many things which I agree with were mentioned. But I ask myself the question: Why do I agree with them, what formed my opinion, by what mechanisms? They must have been different, as I have no formal education in any field, so my interaction with the world was different. Also, the last minutes gave a humble insight, but you what they say: we judge others by our own standards. Guess I see and hear what I want to see and hear. Even when it is the words that were not said.

[@erikziak1249]

stabiljka Currently I feel empty, depleted. I cried to times today. I try not to think now. When I thing I just realize how useless I am. And a bad person. I will never be loved, as I am not worthy for any female. And I can even argue that it is a good thing. Shit, now I think again. Yes, it is similar like the French Jacques, but with an i.

[@paulf3]

I asked Google where I'm going for dinner tonight and the response was basically "we"re not getting involved in your marriage issues"

[@brettblute7739]

I think that is an intelligent response or let's say intuitive, give you are asking an entity known by the name Google. Although the answer does presuppose that you are married and that you would ask your partner what they wanted to eat. Google also presupposed that you would even care what your partner wanted Given that you don't know, "where you are going", the probability is high that you are willing to go where your partner wants to. In that case your partner might tell you to, "Go Google yourself." This is only in theory.

[@drosky310]

Probability, someone showing this video in a courtroom. Is 0.01

[@deeb3272]

The probability of me finishing this video is 99.9%

[@mikec6484]

wtf was the first guy talking about?

[@kirandeepkaur8082]

The host?

[@jeremybarriga9266]

question please, help eg = if my laundry ticket should be 2224 and i chose to play 2224 in lotto game, have i decreased my chancres of winning. obviously, my ticket cant influence the drawing, but the odds of the tickets being the same number .....

[@andrewbautista23]

the Quantum guys seems so nervous, that his voice and hands were shaking.

[@territory361]

that's part of being Quantum

[@WinArmyOfficial]

lol

[@IIIIIawesIIIII]

He's just visualising the uncertainty principle

[@samuelcardenas3123]

itw a 2in or loose which number is th3 greatest and haszero loses to its increase or decrease in a way your all aware 2hats the best number to use that3ill never end as a down fall or invrease another in value

[@toby9999]

Maybe if you fix your spelling and grammatical errors your comments might be comprehensible?

[@cyrillablea8105]

So what if the Bayesian has four kids. Two girls, two boys and one of those boys has nondisjunction trisomy 21 born with appear esophageal atresia. Her mother died at 46 years old she had severe diabetes and renal failure she died from heart attack with pneumonia that she couldn't clear up. the Bayesian was 25 years old with three kids. Her grandmother died at 63 from emphysema and she also had leukemia the Bayesian was 14 years old. Her grandfather died at 56 heart attack, two of her favorite uncles died a year apart one was 62 and one was 63. The older uncle died of inoperable brain aneurysm a close-knit family watching her uncle take every breathand be grateful for his family for six months we were looking at a ticking time bomb and the other uncle died from metastatic cancer throughout his entire body. Her older daughter has diabetes.. now wouldn't you think the Bayesian would have extreme anxiety possibly depression and hypothetically if she was a part of some study that she's not aware of ... She could probably have induced psychosis. Don't you think that she would be going crazy on the internet trying to figure out what was going on.. the Bayesian lost everything her son the last to be takena disease that the Bayesian has that she cannot get any help for because Medicaid won't help. The Bayesian is it completely aware of what's going on in her external surroundings. All she does is cry. She wonders if she's ever made a choice by herself or if everything has been strategically placed for what? Oh yeah the first time she ever walked into a casino she won $4,000 first machine. What do you call her luck being born? All maternal btw. I would think that the Bayesian would be extremely depressed and isolated rocking back and forth in a corner for science. She gets no love so sad. She must be a new world orphan. However, the Bayesian always has hope and is always looking to the brighter side.. because that's where she lives she lives on the bright side.

[@Soupy_loopy]

I don't have my homework because my dog looked at my computer.

[@xoXDonnieXox]

People who are loved and fulfilled don't need substances.

[@MarcCools1964]

What is the chance that you say more times 'eeuh' than other words in a sentence? The more you sit on the left side, the higher the chance.

[@josephchristopher2427]

Wtf CC Sue and I have to get up and get together for loving

[@captainfalcon8615]

I think people underestimate just how much smarter the smartest ten percent of professionals in STEM are and that they're usually two standard deviations (1SD=15) above the mean IQ of the average person and even just the difference between half of one standard deviation (7.5) is quite a bit smarter than the mean and to be 30 points above the mean usually puts you right on the edge of genius

[@AbdiPianoChannel]

One night in 2012 I had dream about serious pandemic where government forced people to stay indoors. As we know that happened in 2020 and it still going on. What was the chance for me to predict that?

[@WilliamFritzM]

It's a popular outcome so it could of been pretty likely.

[@TrevCraig]

John Hockenberrys wheels! :)

[@darksoul479]

No one in the audience guested 6 or 8 on the dice toss? I don't think there's many gamblers in the arena. Especially the person that said 12.

[@NadaII]

Trying to explain quantum computing when you have an accent and suffer from glossophobia = Should have invited the other guy.

[@bentleybogle9171]

Who doesn't have some kind of accent? Do you know that people with his accent may watch this?

[@darksoul479]

Thinking that the coin will eventually come up Tails is what's known as the gambler's fallacy. The odds on the coin toss are 50/50 no matter how many times the coin is tossed.

[@pb4520]

question?? just because u dont know something for sure doesnt mean it's only statistical or probable or whatever. i dont get this at all. it's wherever it is whatever it is imo.

[@DavidBrown-jk2pm]

p b. Schrodinger and Heisenberg would disagree with you. Things ain't until they are.

[@clarencedorona7343]

Can somebody give me a summary of what they are talking about? :< I'm interested to learn

[@spindoctor6385]

possibly the worst demonstration of the Monty Hall problem ever.

[@themiraclesgirl7363]

So current

[@sunmanpatoo]

@1:03:47 I suggest Sanskrit to describe these concepts. It's a much more intricate, honest, & nuanced language. For example, English has but one word for love whereas Sanskrit has 96. In addition, to understand the rules of the quantum world, one must take the demigods into account as well as Vishnu Yajna.

[@kochaos6129]

And, of course, the all important "it's complicated!" 🙃😬🤢😨

[@TPerm-hj4sf]

I repeat, I love this guy.

[@ObiWahn68]

But what if Monty actually knows behind which door the car is and only opens another door if the candidate chose the door with the car behind it?

[@ageofagesworldteacher7939]

Only to be fair you picked the wrong guy to talk about the double slit experiment as it if it ain't hard enough to understand just saying

[@aminkanji8501]

Thank you!

[@mmercier0921]

I read somewhere once that if you roll 5 dice one million times... you will get 6 6's almost every time. The groups of 6 6's will tend to cluster in a narrow range. Chaos theory.

[@Tamodog26]

Explain?

[@fluffycenter9242]

unfortunately not one of my pics are in the motive

[@cosmosaic8117]

Probability of XRP pumping in price? January 19, 2021 we are currently at around $.30...let's see how this ages....

[@2smeevents]

Well

[@johnsanders561]

$1.12 today

[@cosmosaic8117]

@@johnsanders561 Hell yeah. I sold back at like 90 cents in April but might get back in at some point..

[@nancyallen8497]

On the television show "what's happening" the name of the mom was Florida

[@3rdEigenState]

The guy in the wheelchair sounds a lot like John Lithgow.

[@Mac2point1]

no he doesnt

[@blur-t1t]

predictability and determinism are not one and the same

[@legendno1]

probability is not plausibility or possibility

[@KtotheC6342]

About at 49:00 he begins to describe how insurance companies will use this data in charging you your premium for insurance coverage.

[@appletile2887]

The guy from Google seems to be a B. S. artist and is a graduate of the Peter Principle or graduated from Trump university in giving speeches or is good at what he does but cannot explain even the simplest situation.

[@ToxisLT]

question regarding the door game - what if I come to the game knowing the odds, and decide to choose door 1 then, when the host suggest to switch, I go for the door No2. But the door No 2 is eliminated by host as empty. Should I stay? Or should I switch? My odds have changed, haven't they? I had 2 guesses instead of 1 and one was eliminated for me, so I'm better of switching, or then it's 50/50?

[@kriseric1]

+Toxis They didn't do a very good job explaining the Monty Hall problem. You should switch, because revealing the other door provided you with new information meaning your first guess has a higher probability of being wrong.

[@brokkolimannen]

+Toxis When you pick the first time, there is a 1/3 chance it's the right door, and a 2/3 chance its the other two(1/3 + 1/3). Now, when one of the other doors are revealed and is empty, that door is correct 0/3 of the time, and the other door of the ones you didn't initialy pick, is correct 2/3 of the time. Only the removing of one alternative(in this case), changes the probability

[@glutinousmaximus]

You just sniff at cracks in the doors. I can't tell you what goat smells of..!

[@TheOilyPete]

@@brokkolimannen ttttyy I'm in

[@orcvsivstitia7608]

Hey world science peeps. Do the odds on the 2020 Election "abnormalities" all happening. I dare you.

[@irmagonzalez1235]

Think about the algorithm of the chart plot

[@AtlasReburdened]

What's the probability that an imagined intellectual will take non racial things to a racial place?

[@nina-bh4nx]

95% of the time. With a victim mentality anything is possible

[@djdedan]

ask yourself this question and honestly answer: if it's possible, like in the movie trading places for example, would you trade places with a black person of the same socioeconomic level as you have now?

[@Electronic424]

@@djdedan then also ask the same question for blacks, would blacks want to become a white person who rather enjoys intellectual conversation and critical thinking instead of basketball and hip hop?

[@brandonclark8395]

@@Electronic424 What's the probability that you know little about the multitude of patented black inventions in America? I'll take 100% Alex.

[@Electronic424]

@@brandonclark8395 Well there are so few, the chances are unlikely I would know any.

[@samuelcardenas3123]

whydo you still add decimalls to y9ur loss3s

[@treidchimney]

i like you a LOT, thanks very much

[@fluffycenter9242]

you erased my latst input on your pod cast... why and what is your addendum

[@mmercier0921]

Luck is a most important thing when dealing with chaos. These people are in fact wotking to develop autonomous leathal weapons platforms for military applications. Remember where you heard it first. Most of this development is going on at hanscom in massachusetts, and stanford in California. Defense advanced research projects agency. darpa. Been going on for a long time. A necessary thing. Most reading this have no idea what is going on.

[@davidcostello4545]

Hi opps forgot your name professor Wheels. Just wondering what's the probability that my internet is good everytime I watch your content

[@MyStarPeopleExperiences]

What's the probability Uber Eats encourages order makers to text "Faster is as faster does"?

[@MyStarPeopleExperiences]

Answer: 100%. Based upon Forest Gump's: "Stupid is as stupid does".

[@alchemicalvisionstudios3969]

The double slit experiment was Conducted with photons Not electrons.

[@jweber4548]

Actually both

[@40below1000]

Probability this user enjoyed this video: 100 per cent

[@j.d.4697]

Help please, I can't live without rationality and irrational people drive me crazy!

[@bobcloughjr]

What are the odds that's a lie about getting arrested in Vegas? 100 percent

[@chunglee7531]

When you imposed the condition that a girl named Florida, you automatically illuminated the family has two girl, because you don’t name both girls Florida. It is tricky, not science.

[@mexicanlawconsultant]

In college (Chemical Engineering) there was only 2 or 3 women out of around 50 students during 1995, the same holds true for other neighboring colleges (Math, Physics) Are women less attracted to science by natural evolution, if so what is the probability of changing that (natural evolution) so that more women are inclined to STEAM majors? I believe IQ between women are men are pretty much the same, it is just that women seem not to be interested in sciences!

[@justinking5964]

I wanna apply my discover into Ai prediction. I have studied pick 3 for many years and I gain some secerets of it. But mathmatician says lottery can't be predicted. I disagree. it's not that simple either black or white.

[@jeremybarriga9266]

eg = if the lottery is 5 number sequence , and is truly random , then why do i never recall seeing, or hearing of a winning sequnce of , lets say 77777 ?

[@wbiro]

Your Dengue Fever example conclusion (that your positive test result has only a 9% chance of being right) of Conditional Probability is wrong. Your 9% accuracy claim contradicts the 99.9% accuracy claim. You cannot have both. You must retract the 99.9% accuracy, since your conclusion claims 9%, meaning you cannot use 99.9% in the first place, you must begin with 9%, then, according to your error, that would then leave you with 0.9%, and now you are at an infinite regression. Your error is at 2:36. The 99.9% does not return 10 additional inaccurate results, it apples to each test individually, where, since no test is 100% accurate, no one may be sick, or everyone may be sick, rather than returning 10 (as you erroneously claimed). Those probabilities are astronomically low (.01 times itself 10,000 times), but they are not zero. The result could be any number, and each group of 10,000 will, in all probability, be different. Ignoring all of that even, consider the other probability, .01% who actually get sick. This is a probability that is based on Big Data if it is to be reliable (which is what insurance companies go on). But even that is based on uneven samplings, such as one group of 10,000 having no one sick, and another many. (a concrete example is a hurricane - which creates clumps of claims). Now for your 9% probability. That probability must apply to all of the negative results, too (that their results only have a 9% chance of being accurately negative), and now where are you? With two things: with a very high probability that everyone is sick (all the negative tests having only a 9% chance of being accurate), and with a very crappy test... but... The test is 99.9% accurate for each individual test, so it is not crappy, and we can throw your 9% probability out the window, since it makes no sense (and also since it contradicts the first claim of 99.9% accuracy, which applies to EACH INDIVIDUAL TEST, remember, and not for the aggregate group, as you erroneously thought).

[@NOTHIM6969]

What are you talking about...

[@patriciaegan8149]

What's the probability of the probability of not using living creatures to test your probability theories?

[@fluffycenter9242]

yup

[@devonk298]

I believe in equal rights for Bayes!

[@richardrombouts1883]

Do you believe that conditionally or unconditionally?

[@rbspider]

Whats the probability that the google guy will cause people to lose interest? 100%

[@sainathm36]

Any DePaul Students here doing assignment?

[@infinity.1111]

100%.. the odds are 100%. In this branch of the universe anyway.