3 ms·
It's much like the Monte Hall problem, in that people often forget to include the portion about the revealed door ALWAYS being a loser. If it were a randomly o
by andrewclunn 4y ago
It's much like the Monte Hall problem, in that people often forget to include the portion about the revealed door ALWAYS being a loser. If it were a randomly opened door then the option to switch would actually just be 50/50. This can be shown by just running the simulation over thousands of iterations. The same is true here. It's not actually going to yield better outcomes to switch. Sometimes logicians just need to own up to the fact that empiricism and applied mathematics is where the rubber meets the road.
- selimthegrim 4y agoI’m not sure how literally applying Bayes’ theorem and reducing the sample space accordingly is owning logicians but you do you.
- rtkwe 4y agoThe difference between this and the Monte Hall problem is there's no new information revealed or pool reduction here.