Calax

But will freeze my tuchas off in sub zero temps.

http://kotaku.com/5591036/zone-of-enders-f...-crashing-power WWOOOOOOO YYEEEEAAAHHHHH!!!!! ZEEE OOHHHH EEEE! Z. O. E. Z. O. E.! ... Sorry... I just <3 Zone of the Enders.

Kafty, did you look at the options? I'ts high performance but the options that made me go O.o was the built in Playstation jack.

So what you're doing is taking four contests, and calculating the odds of one person winning all four against 16 million people each. Thing is that that requires that people be winning four consecutive times. However, for the most part these contests are independent of one another. Each of the contests has the same chance of winning that the first had for each person. And obviously if they won the first one it's entirely possible that they can win the second, third, and fourth. Basically if all four contests were with the same people, the chances of one person winning all of them would be 1/<however many>

Well, the Sonata I was buying fell through so now I'm probably gonna pick up this for much cheaper. also ran across this which made me both drool and fear at the same time.

Wait, WHAT? You're going about that all wrong. The chances of somebody winning again are based on their individual chances compared to every other participant in the second contest. You don't keep "slimming down" the pool/odds so that it's harder and harder to win like that. The chances overall of that sequence of events happening are lower than them winning a contest, but they still have the same chances to win the contest as any other participant.

I don't wanna do the "man up". I'm kinda thinking I'd do a few days of heavy driving, but I'd also have a few days where I look around and have fun at locations (denver for example)

Odds are odds, low or high there is little difference between them. You've been saying "impossible" and increasing the odds of winning a lottery every time somebody tries again. And yet you just posted in the one I quoted, that somebody doing an independent thing doesn't change the overall odds, which, I believe, is Alans big point for the last five pages. People have the same chance of winning the Lottery (which does happen, it's not "Impossible" like you say) any time they play it, it doesn't jump when they win once like you seem to think that they do.

Well, Honestly I don't have a problem with steam scanning my system given that Warcraft has something that does that already.

Really? You're the one who claimed that winning the lottery a second time was impossible because of the odds, when winning it the first time is proof that it's possible to win, so winning a second time (while a long shot) is still possible, same with a third or a fourth. Or are you going back no the last 10 pages of garbage you've been pitching?

Well, Cheap motels are a given, but I'd prefer to save money as much as I can... And understand, this is the trip that's taking all my stuff to college, my clothes, books, computer, luggage, bedding etc, all are gonna be packed in the back of my vehicle (which will be pretty small) so I won't exactly be able to stretch out in the back on the seat with that many boxes around.

Um, lol! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expected_value Hahahaha caught out once more, Dagon. That's not exactly what I meant. You should know that English is ambiguous. Answer me one question, do you know that the probability of an event that already happened is one? If not, you shouldn't be discussing probabilities and taking a class instead, it's literally the first thing in probability theory. To use alanschu's own example, lets say he brings a bomb with him, and let's say the probability of a bomb is 1 in 1000. The probabilty of there being two bombs planted independently would be 1 in 1000 x 1000, i.e. 1 in a million. But since alanschu already brought the first bomb, its probabilty is actually 1. So now the probability of 2 bombs is 1 in 1 x 1000, i.e. the same as probability of 1 bomb. And the same thing works with the lotto, so you just proved everyone else right in that the probability of somebody winning a different lottery that is totally independent of the first is the same as winning the first.

A silly yu-gi-oh take on the thing

Dagon... How can no person and somebody win at the same time in one contest?

meh, couches have things called air conditioning and you can spread out.

Ok, I'm driving from Sacramento California to Ames Iowa, and was wondering if some poor soul would want to take pity on this one and let me (and possibly one other) surf on your couch for at least one night (intending to leave on august 10th using Hwy 50 east). Also suggestions and advice for said road trip would be appriciated.

I don't understand why a book series that revolves around unique characters that get killed off frequently and political conspiracy would be a good fit for an RTS. Because it had a war in it... that's all I got.

And yet somebody still wins, thus it is possible, unless you're saying impossible =/= "It will never ever occur"

It's really simple, Every pregnancy is a result of a 1/200 million (best odds) of a race/lottery. Actually longer if you include natural relationships rather than just a pitri dish version from a single coupling. No, getting a particular sperm would be those odds. Getting one of them is actually quite good, like 1 in 10, otherwise no one would ever be born. No two sperm have the exact same DNA. Transcription errors, minor dna mutations, and a bit of a blending between chromosomes (IIRC) all factor into the creation of a little tadpole. If they were almost exactly alike then everyone and their sibilings would be almost clones. Also factoring in X vs Y chromosomes. I had a bit of Anthro last semester but I'm starting to loose it again . If sperm was that close, eggs would be in a similar boat and we wouldn't have the genetic variation we needed in order to survive. And Dagon, yes, the odds of SOMEBODY winning it are better than one specific person, as the odds of SOMEBODY in the world winning it are 1 (unless the operators are schiesters). That's like saying "The odds of the Earth getting hit by a meteor are larger than the odds of the earth getting hit by a meteor in 10 minutes at 41n 22' 22" and 21w 13' 07".

Yes, and that's the point. And actually why I liked you picking the square root of 1 million because it saved me time. Since the odds of winning this lottery is 1/1000. You admit that it is possible for someone to win a lottery at 1/1000. Since winning a lottery is an independent event, the chances of someone winning a lottery that has already won one is also 1/1000. Since 1/1000 is an acceptable probability that you concede is possible, therefore it is possible for someone to have already won the lottery, to win it again. This is because the odds of winning a second lottery, having already won the first lottery, is still 1/1000. The odds of any individual winning 2 lotteries is, as you state, 1 in a million (1/1000 * 1/1000). However, since you definitively state that winning something with 1/1000000 odds is impossible, you then paradoxically must be concluding that the odds of someone winning a second lottery having already won 1 lottery MUST be 0. Not 1/1000. In your world, since winning two lotteries of these odds is impossible, you must believe that anyone that has already won the lottery has a 0% chance of winning another lottery. 0 != 0.001 I said 1/1000 is a reasonable probabilty, 1 in 1 million is not. Don't confuse a probability not being reasonable with it being 0. I'm not saying the odds of someone winning two lotteries are impossible, I'm saying the odds of a pre-determined person winning two lotteries are impossible. Until you understand the difference, we're not going to get anywhere. Wait, WHAT!? Dude, what's the difference if it's pre-determined or just by chance? It's the same situation of 1 person winning two lotteries. True, kinda... But if another sperm made it then you wouldn't be you. To may a single specific person who already exists 1 sperm had to defy "Impossible" (In your words) odds to pull it off.

It's really simple, Every pregnancy is a result of a 1/200 million (best odds) of a race/lottery. Actually longer if you include natural relationships rather than just a pitri dish version from a single coupling.

It's still possible, contrary to your ravings.

I don't know, your inability to grasp even the simplest of probability makes it sound more like you're the one in fifth grade. When something has an independent probability of happening it doesn't change in relation to another action. Is that REALLY that hard to grasp?

Uh, dagon... he has a 1/1000 chance of winning the first if he wins or looses, he has a 1/1000 chance of winning the next if he wins or looses, he has a 1/1000 chance of winning the next continue to infiniti I have NO idea how you passed algebra right now

Odds of 1 in 1 million are certainly not impossible. If you'd like, I could do the exact same example with 1/1000 odds. It'll just take me more message board posts to accomplish it. Go ahead.