5 ms·

I want to know what happens when you are asked to pick a random number. How does the brain work that out?

323 5y ago
It's well established that 17 is the most random number between 1 and 20. https://www.livejournal.com/poll/?id=961998 https://www.livejournal.com/poll/?id=961998
- jcims 5y ago
  Quick consultation with GPT-3 on the subject. Q is me A is the computer. — Q: What is the most random number between one and 20? A: 17 Q: Why do you say that? A: Because it is impossible to know for sure which number will come up when you roll a die or draw a card from a deck. Q: So why did you pick 17? A: It is just as likely as any other number to come up. Q: But I specifically asked for the most random number. What is the most random number? A: There is no such thing as the most random number. Q: Then why did you say 17? A: Because it is as random as any other number. Q: OK then, what is the least random number between one and 20? A: 1
  - 323 5y ago
    We wanted artificial intelligence, but what we got is artificial stupidity :)
    - ozzmotik 5y ago
      stupidity is just misapplied or developing intelligence. can't have one without the other lol
    - jacquesm 5y ago
      Stupidity beats insanity by a large amount.
    - galaxyLogic 5y ago
      It's an old saying that: Having opinions is great, because opinions are already half intelligence. But come to think of it, is there any AI which has "opinions"? Wouldn't that take AI closer to human intelligence?
      - vurpo 5y ago
        GPT-3 and these kind of natural language generators in general can already present opinions if prompted to do so. Depending on what you mean by "opinion", you might also require some memory to let it be consistent in what opinions it presents to you. (Not that humans are always consistent either.) If you dig any further than this into the question, you quickly get back to the age-old question of "when is it 'real' consciousness and not just an automaton that acts and sounds conscious?"
        galaxyLogic 5y ago
        True. I'm just thinking of what makes AI different from people. Could "opinions" be such a thing. When we say somebody has an "opinion" we often mean they have some hidden agenda why they raise their "opinion". It is not a fact but opinion. It is frequently about what should be done, and to whom, and thus is most often self-serving. Humans are intention driven creatures which continuously try to advance their own agendas. So I wonder are there AIs which would exhibit similar behavior, trying to influence the behavior of others with their "opinions". AAnd do we need such AIs? Are they not evil?
  - 8note 5y ago
    Everyone knows the certifiable random is 4, but I agree that 1 is the least random of them
thecoppinger 5y ago
I imagine by finding a number with some sub-conscious relevance in that moment, then convincing our conscious self that it’s random.
- junon 5y ago
  I'm literally the furthest thing from a neuro expert but I feel like we do this with a lot of things. Over-confidence is a pretty on the nose example.
asddubs 5y ago
I read somewhere a long time ago that when asked to pick a random number between 1 and 10, people are way more likely to pick 7 than anything else
- function_seven 5y ago
  I've confirmed this experimentally. (As in, I asked a bunch of people to "pick a number from 1 to 10"). But that was a long time ago, and I wonder if the common knowledge that '7' is the most popular would sway people to avoid it. I know I do. I should re-run this. In any case, it's clear that 7 is the most random digit, right? The other digits are either even or otherwise "nice". 7 is chaotic and unpredictable. 7 sells loose cigarettes to middle school kids. 7 will leave the shopping cart in the middle of the parking lot. Of all the digits in [1-10], it's 7 who'll more likely than not be the one who left the bathroom stall without flushing.
  - irrational 5y ago
    It's easy to draw a shape with 3 (triangle), 4 (square), 5 (pentagon or star shape), 6 (2 overlapping triangles), 8 (2 overlapping squares), 9 (3 overlapping triangles), and 10 (2 overlapping pentagons) sides; but a seven sided shape? Screw that.
    - function_seven 5y ago
      You just reminded me of something from when I worked at a pizza place. Most of the time we sold pizzas cut the normal way. Either 6, 8, or 10 slices using a circular cutter. The normal style you might have in your kitchen. But one Wednesday each month, we had a massive lunch order for a local school. Hundreds of individually-boxed slices, delivered just before 11:30. The slice box was sized for a 1/7 slice of our extra large pizza. We had to use a "wagon wheel" type slicer for those. It was a huge stainless thing that must've cost a fortune. I always wondered why it was 7 slices and not 6 or 8. The best theory I could come up with was that these slices all had to be the exact same size; no variance from sloppy cutting. And the only way to ensure that would be to specify it as an odd number to make it impractical for the normal cutter.
throwamon 5y ago
This may indirectly answer your question: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tP-Ipsat90c https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tP-Ipsat90c TLDW: We don't pick numbers at random. At all. We're so bad at it that you can make money off this fact.
- amelius 5y ago
  This is why, when someone asks me to pick a random number, I try to think of some random process going on in my surroundings, and from there derive the random number.
  - doliveira 5y ago
    That's very cool. Do you have any examples? It's the kind of thing you can't give much thought to on the spot
    - DizzyDoo 5y ago
      A common tactic for Poker players who want to make some of their actions in a common scenario random (call in one instance, or perhaps re-raise instead) is to look at their wrist watch, and depending on where the second hand is they can simulate a coin flip or a dice roll.
      - psyc 5y ago
        That’s cool. Seed(Time()) is as old as… it’s old.
  - jacquesm 5y ago
    And still, you always come up with 4.
    - oshiar53-0 5y ago
      a truely randall number
sorokod 5y ago
Not very well. The brain evolved in environment that encourages the assumption that events are dependent. The concept of independent events is not natural to us.

323 5y ago

It's well established that 17 is the most random number between 1 and 20. https://www.livejournal.com/poll/?id=961998 https://www.livejournal.com/poll/?id=961998

jcims 5y ago
Quick consultation with GPT-3 on the subject. Q is me A is the computer. — Q: What is the most random number between one and 20? A: 17 Q: Why do you say that? A: Because it is impossible to know for sure which number will come up when you roll a die or draw a card from a deck. Q: So why did you pick 17? A: It is just as likely as any other number to come up. Q: But I specifically asked for the most random number. What is the most random number? A: There is no such thing as the most random number. Q: Then why did you say 17? A: Because it is as random as any other number. Q: OK then, what is the least random number between one and 20? A: 1
- 323 5y ago
  We wanted artificial intelligence, but what we got is artificial stupidity :)
  - ozzmotik 5y ago
    stupidity is just misapplied or developing intelligence. can't have one without the other lol
  - jacquesm 5y ago
    Stupidity beats insanity by a large amount.
  - galaxyLogic 5y ago
    It's an old saying that: Having opinions is great, because opinions are already half intelligence. But come to think of it, is there any AI which has "opinions"? Wouldn't that take AI closer to human intelligence?
    - vurpo 5y ago
      GPT-3 and these kind of natural language generators in general can already present opinions if prompted to do so. Depending on what you mean by "opinion", you might also require some memory to let it be consistent in what opinions it presents to you. (Not that humans are always consistent either.) If you dig any further than this into the question, you quickly get back to the age-old question of "when is it 'real' consciousness and not just an automaton that acts and sounds conscious?"
      - galaxyLogic 5y ago
        True. I'm just thinking of what makes AI different from people. Could "opinions" be such a thing. When we say somebody has an "opinion" we often mean they have some hidden agenda why they raise their "opinion". It is not a fact but opinion. It is frequently about what should be done, and to whom, and thus is most often self-serving. Humans are intention driven creatures which continuously try to advance their own agendas. So I wonder are there AIs which would exhibit similar behavior, trying to influence the behavior of others with their "opinions". AAnd do we need such AIs? Are they not evil?
- 8note 5y ago
  Everyone knows the certifiable random is 4, but I agree that 1 is the least random of them

thecoppinger 5y ago

I imagine by finding a number with some sub-conscious relevance in that moment, then convincing our conscious self that it’s random.

junon 5y ago
I'm literally the furthest thing from a neuro expert but I feel like we do this with a lot of things. Over-confidence is a pretty on the nose example.

asddubs 5y ago

I read somewhere a long time ago that when asked to pick a random number between 1 and 10, people are way more likely to pick 7 than anything else

function_seven 5y ago
I've confirmed this experimentally. (As in, I asked a bunch of people to "pick a number from 1 to 10"). But that was a long time ago, and I wonder if the common knowledge that '7' is the most popular would sway people to avoid it. I know I do. I should re-run this. In any case, it's clear that 7 is the most random digit, right? The other digits are either even or otherwise "nice". 7 is chaotic and unpredictable. 7 sells loose cigarettes to middle school kids. 7 will leave the shopping cart in the middle of the parking lot. Of all the digits in [1-10], it's 7 who'll more likely than not be the one who left the bathroom stall without flushing.
- irrational 5y ago
  It's easy to draw a shape with 3 (triangle), 4 (square), 5 (pentagon or star shape), 6 (2 overlapping triangles), 8 (2 overlapping squares), 9 (3 overlapping triangles), and 10 (2 overlapping pentagons) sides; but a seven sided shape? Screw that.
  - function_seven 5y ago
    You just reminded me of something from when I worked at a pizza place. Most of the time we sold pizzas cut the normal way. Either 6, 8, or 10 slices using a circular cutter. The normal style you might have in your kitchen. But one Wednesday each month, we had a massive lunch order for a local school. Hundreds of individually-boxed slices, delivered just before 11:30. The slice box was sized for a 1/7 slice of our extra large pizza. We had to use a "wagon wheel" type slicer for those. It was a huge stainless thing that must've cost a fortune. I always wondered why it was 7 slices and not 6 or 8. The best theory I could come up with was that these slices all had to be the exact same size; no variance from sloppy cutting. And the only way to ensure that would be to specify it as an odd number to make it impractical for the normal cutter.

throwamon 5y ago

This may indirectly answer your question: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tP-Ipsat90c https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tP-Ipsat90c TLDW: We don't pick numbers at random. At all. We're so bad at it that you can make money off this fact.

amelius 5y ago
This is why, when someone asks me to pick a random number, I try to think of some random process going on in my surroundings, and from there derive the random number.
- doliveira 5y ago
  That's very cool. Do you have any examples? It's the kind of thing you can't give much thought to on the spot
  - DizzyDoo 5y ago
    A common tactic for Poker players who want to make some of their actions in a common scenario random (call in one instance, or perhaps re-raise instead) is to look at their wrist watch, and depending on where the second hand is they can simulate a coin flip or a dice roll.
    - psyc 5y ago
      That’s cool. Seed(Time()) is as old as… it’s old.
- jacquesm 5y ago
  And still, you always come up with 4.
  - oshiar53-0 5y ago
    a truely randall number

sorokod 5y ago

Not very well. The brain evolved in environment that encourages the assumption that events are dependent. The concept of independent events is not natural to us.