3 ms·
Yeah, thought so - it's specifically heads->tails, rather than either heads->tails or tails->heads being okay. So the probabilities don't seem remotely counteri
by Qwertious 11y ago
Yeah, thought so - it's specifically heads->tails, rather than either heads->tails or tails->heads being okay. So the probabilities don't seem remotely counterintuitive, just crappily communicated IMO.
- tempestn 11y agoI'm not sure your explanation fits with the probabilities. Pointing out that you're only looking for heads->tails and not tails->heads seems to suggest that the HT pattern should be less likely than the HH, but it's actually more likely (for reasons explained well by others).