/b/ is way too stupid to answer this question correctly.

1/2

>>720122327
Point proven. /b/ is filled with mongoloids.

probability questions are a great way to make no-life autisitic nu-males feel superior cus they were good little boys during math class.

good luck applying this to an actual mans job faggots. you have been replaced with computers for a reason, nobody likes smarter-than-thou aspie brainlets

-1/12

>>720122251
the odds are two outta five or a forty percent chance of pulling a gold ball next

>>720122476
What algorithms do you think artificial intelligence use to learn?

They use probabilistic models, more often than not Bayesian models. This question is a basic Bayesian probability question. If you don't understand this you cannot build any probabilistic machine (control system, AI, recommendation system like Netflix, ranking system like Google.)

Enjoy your "man's" job in the woods like a savage while I continue running your shit.

>>720122512
>>720122565
Both wrong.

Common /b/, this is an easy question.

>>720122251
OP did some maths today in class and thinks he's superior

>>720122406
Even if Box 1 has a million gold balls, if you choose a box with one gold ball, the only two options are either the next ball is or is not gold, since there are only two boxes, one with another gold ball to pick, and one without.

>>720122476
/thread

2/3 last time this thread was posted, 2/3 today.

it's 50%. if you say anything different you are literally retarded.

>>720122721
Well justifying a wrong answer with an incorrect intuition doesn't make it anymore correct.

If you pick a random box. If after the first pick you have a gold ball, then it is most probable you have the box with 2 gold balls. Thus, it has to be greater than 1/2. What is the answer then?

>>720122609
enjoy being a weak little faggot with no pussy because women dont give a fuck about autistic number running bullshit, they want a MAN who can PROTECT and PROVIDE for her.

replace yourself with a machine and she'll replace you with a machine too. just watch.

>>720122761
Correct.

5 wrong answers
2 people thinking they are better than math because they are savages
1 correct answer

/b/ is looking rough or maybe just underage

Given the 2 silver ball box can be eliminated from the initial 1/3 chance it is a 66.666' chance to pick up another golden ball.

>>720122875
Lol, protect and provide. As though we live in a feudal society. Protect and provide means having money. Tech makes more money than your ancestral occupation. Enjoy your alcoholism and white trash.

>>720122640
/rcon !restart /r alternatereality.cfg

two out of five possibilities also expressed as a forty percent chance are both correct, are you high?

>>720122251
P(left box | gold) = P (left box ^ gold) / P (gold) = P (left box) / P (gold) = (1/3) / (1/2) = 2/3
P(second gold | gold) = P (left box | gold) = 2/3

>>720122872
But that's not the question

>>720122872
thats not how this works you fucking retard

>>720122974
You're retarded.

>>720122979
Correct

>>720122980
It is. Learning how to read is the first step to answering a problem.

>>720122919
there is no answer for your level of stupid.

>>720122989
It is. Refer to this anon who proved it correctly: >>720122979

This is a conditional probability question.

>>720122971
lol you are so stupid and autistic. you have no idea what real life is about because you spend all your time posting on image boards and playing video games.

like i said faggot, in the end, what women REALLY want is good dick, and im 100% sure you cannot possible provide that. its ok, your bull will be very nice to you while you prep him.

>>720122761
It's actually 75%. It's impossible for you to be on the 3rd box. If you're on the first box (which you have a 50% chance of being in), then you have a 100% chance of pulling a gold ball. If you're in the 2nd box (again, 50% chance), you have a 50% chance of pulling a gold ball. So it's 75%.

50% + 50% of 50% = 50% + 25% = 75%

File: 1481115420827.jpg (54KB, 600x571px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 600x571px

It's impossible to answer because it was not specified if the ball was replaced or not.

For any half educated mathematician, this is the equivalent of setting a question where you forgot to put a pen in your hand before you wrote it, and also somehow accidentally getting your dick caught in the desk fan.

>>720123082
no, it is basic probability. you have two boxes, one box contains a gold ball, the other contains a silver ball. 50% chance everyday.

>>720123083
Simpleton white trash women enjoy only good dick. Even those enjoy financial security more than "good dick". Despite me doubting you are above average in bed given this puzzle is too demanding for you I am sure you will never achieve more than working a dead end blue collar job for the rest of your life.

>>720123033
>Learning how to read
But you have to draw a gold ball for it to work, so you must eliminate the silver ball box, making it only 2 possible boxes you could have, one with silver, and one with gold

>>720123074
Denial is a beautiful thing isn't it. The answer is 2/3. If you do not believe it refer to this anon: >>720122979. If you still dont believe it you're a mongoloid too.

>>720123083
Stay mad you subhuman. As I said enjoy your white trash. It's emanating from your posts.

We all know that tech jobs are alpha, while you are a beta who works for a poverty wage and kills yourself overworking while being proud to be wearing blue collars.

>>720122640
>calls -1/12 wrong
Are you aware that -1/12 is a meme good sir?

2/3 is correct btw

>>720123195
No, there are 3 gold balls, not 2. So it's X out of 3.

And since 2 of the those 3 gold balls are in the same box (i.e. in a box with another gold ball), it's 2 out of 3.

>>720123195
And to add to this, the people counting the 3rd box in their equations are the actual morons, even though you may know math, you don't have any critical thinking. You already know you must be in box 1 or 2, even though there is a 3rd box, you can safely ignore it, because there are no gold balls in it. There could be 500 boxes, but if there is 1 box with 1 gold and 1 silver, another with 2 golds, and 498 with 2 silvers each, you can safely ignore them all because you will NEVER be in any of them (you already pulled a golden ball, for god's sakes).

>>720123195
That's incorrect.

>>720123216
If it doesn't say with replacement then it's not with replacement retard. Simple enough. Read the problem, solve it.

>>720123225
Enjoy your idiocy.

>>720123260
You don't eliminate it, you condition your set upon the gold ball having been pick. Seriously read this anons response: >>720122979

File: 1329528414321.jpg (58KB, 500x199px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 500x199px

>>720122251
this is the monty hall problem.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Hall_problem

i hope that at least a single /b/ tard will realise today that he is in fact fallible like all humans. to everyone saying it's 50/50 even after reading this, kys kthxbye

>>720123270
that formula doesn't apply to this problem. but that's ok, basic maths isn't for everybody, don't feel too bad for yourself.

>>720123358
You already pulled one out, genius... Think about it... Really think about it, strain your brain there for a minute.

>>720123295
I was unaware. 2/3 is correct.

>>720123358
That's the wrong idea. You got the correct answer by fluke. But, the way you justified it is incorrect.

>>720123379
Still wrong. Again justifying a wrong answer with an incorrect intuition doesn't make it anymore correct.

>>720123393
But you didn't choose the silver silver, it's eliminated you retard, you have to draw a golden ball

>>720123195
You can't pull a second gold ball out of the second box, though. If you drew one initially, that would be the only one there.

>>720122251
the boxes are actually irrelevant in this question, you can solve this just considering the balls alone.

>>720123393
>That's incorrect
>Can't explain why

What am I being doing trying to argue with either a retard or a baiter.

>>720123450
No it's not. The conditional probability affects the set differently in this problem. It is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand's_box_paradox

>>720123460
Lol read the wiki please. Stop being retarded.

>>720122476
If you manage to achieve some moderate success in this life despite you're shit attitude, you can look forward to sucking actuary dick for the rest of your life because you don't actually know how anything fundamentally works.

>>720123482
>>720123494
Both incorrect assumptions.

>>720123506
The boxes are very important. If you disregard the boxes you are not solving the problem correctly.

>>720123522
An anon already solved it in the thread with the correct proof. Refer to: >>720122979

>>720123393
>isn't capable of critical thinking
>doesn't realise he's actually retarded

>>720123494
You are right, then it's 50%. Either you're in the 0% probability box (the 2nd) or you're in the 100% probability box (the 1st). I was actually the moron, thanks for pointing it out (but so was everyone else).

>>720123225

lol this is like looking at something with a 99% chance versus a 1% chance and saying its 50/50 because "it can either happen or it won't"

>>720123522
It's incorrect. Since we know you pulled a gold ball, there's a higher chance you picked box 1 as opposed to box 2. Keep restarting the experiment where you pick a random box and then a random ball. In the cases where you picked a gold ball, 2/3 of the time you will have chosen box 1.

>>720123249
>>720123270
these autistic faggots are so mad lol

>>720123667
> Can't solve a simple logic question
> Calls other people unable of critical thought
Interesting.

>>720123670
Lol you let an idiot convince you to go from having the correct answer to the incorrect answer. That's probably worse than originally having the wrong answer.

It's not 50%

>>720122327
So actually the very first post was the correct answer. Who would have thought.

>>720123658
>calls people idiots for getting the question wrong
>gets the question wrong

File: 1329528345002s.jpg (4KB, 126x112px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 126x112px

>>720123566
you are right of course. it's very similar to the monty hall problem, though

>>720122251
Box with gold ball: 2/3

Box with 2 gold ball: 1/3

Your odds: 50% of second gold ball.

>>720123741
Correct.

>>720123752
Solve the problem, it's easy. if you can't then admit it and learn something new. Don't be a useful idiot (blue collar worker).

>>720123658

put any number of gold/silver balls in those two boxes and you will get the right answer if you consider only the 2 balls.

>>720123658
If you drew the gold ball out of the box containing silver and gold, how would you then draw another gold without being in box 1? Thus, you cannot pull a second gold ball out of the second box. If you drew one initially, that would be the only one there (the remaining ball would be silver).

File: 1382829646741.jpg (14KB, 395x393px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 395x393px

>>720123799
except it's not and you are wrong.

So I've taken a box, in that box is a gold ball. Knowing this we can discard the silver box entirely. We now have 2 boxes left that can be the one I have chosen. In this box that I have picked, there remains either 1 gold ball or 1 silver ball as we have already taken 1 gold out.
The odds are 1/2 (50%).

>>720123787
i think this guy is the op. he doesn't realise how stupid he is

>>720123864
only the balls* didn't mean to include the 2

The answer is 2/3

protip: you can ignore the box with two silver balls completely

>>720123799
>>720123801
50% is not the correct answer. Read the thread.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand's_box_paradox

>>720123805
Yeah very similar. Both are very confusing without some knowledge of probability theory.

>>720123834
lol wut. This is extremely wrong. How did you get any of those values.

>>720123473
>>720123473
>That's the wrong idea. You got the correct answer by fluke. But, the way you justified it is incorrect.
No, you're incorrect.

It's really quite simple. You draw a gold ball first. There are 3 gold balls, and there's an equal chance you drew any one of them. So the easiest way to visualize the solution is to look at the 3 gold balls independently. And for each of them ask, what color is the other ball in the box?

>>720123658
>Both incorrect assumptions.
But the problem isn't being done repetitively it is done only once in the problem, hence it is 1/2

>>720123862
lol dont use phrases you dont understand moron, you are the useful idiot here. i bet you fell for the overpopulation meme lol

>>720123358

Wrong. Initial condition is you are in 1 of 2 boxes which contain gold balls.

3rd box is irrelevant to initial condition.

50% chance.

IF the initial condition were not given as gold ball, but as silver ball, odds would be more complex.

>>720122251
zero because of the way you framed the question

i dont understand how people are so idiotic,

if you ALREADY have a gold ball how much chance is it to get a second one, obviously you have the first or the second box so 50%

>>720124087
Who mentioned a third box? You did. Nobody's considering the third box except you.

>>720123930

>So I've taken a box, in that box is a gold ball. Knowing this we can discard the silver box entirely.

You can also "half-discard" the mixed box for the same reason

thats why the probability is biased towards it being the gold+gold box and the answer is 2/3

>>720123864
This is intelligible.

>>720123915
So there is a possibility that the second ball drawn will be silver. However, it is more likely that it will be a gold ball, since it is more likely that the first gold ball came from the box with two gold balls inside.

>>720123930
Wrong.

>>720123938
I am the OP and I am right. Read the wiki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand's_box_paradox

File: 1377677242267.jpg (46KB, 600x456px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 600x456px

>>720124087
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand's_box_paradox

>>720124087
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand's_box_paradox

>>720124029
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand's_box_paradox

>>720123930
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand's_box_paradox

>>720123450
Nope. It was TRYING to be, but was set up wrong in the problem statement. Monty hall problem relies on single item and all 3 doors in play. This is simple 1 in 2.

If you RESTATE problem as PULL OUT SILVER BALL, then what is probability of 2nd ball being GOLD, this would not be 50%.

>>720124202
Okay, you have 2 boxes, GG and GS, you draw a gold from one, whats the probability you draw another gold from the same box?

>>720124198
Except there's a 2 in 3 chance the gold ball you just drew came from the first box. So the first box counts twice, the second box counts once. (If you're counting boxes, which is a very misleading approaching.)

>>720122761
Correct.

I think people didn't read the problem correctly. The solution is to ignore the box with two silvers and focus on golds. There's a 1/4 Chance of a silver in the beginning.

Removing one gold brings that chance to 1/3 for silver and 2/3 for gold.

You are all fucking retarded if you can't read.

>>720122327
correct
>>720122406
retarded
>>720122512
incorrect
>>720122565
incorrect
>>720122761
incorrect
>>720122870
correct
>>720122919
retarded
>>720122944
incorrect
>>720123033
retarded
>>720123225
correct
>>720123295
incorrect
>>720123358
incorrect
>>720123393
retarded

>>720124239
Yes, but my statement was exclusively referring to the 2nd box, and the fact that you can't draw two gold balls out of a box containing silver and gold. I never referenced the probability that the second one will be a gold ball. Incorrect assumption.

File: 1333257712292.gif (2MB, 200x150px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 200x150px

>>720124276
>autistic screeching

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand's_box_paradox

>>720122251
33 percent

>>720124198

There is a higher chance you got the gold ball from the first box

>>720124328
Still 2 out of 3. Here:

G1 G2 | G3 S1

If you just drew a gold, you have an equal chance of drawing G1, G2, or G3.

If you drew G1, the next ball is G2. (Win.)

If you drew G2, the next ball is G1. (Win.)

If you drew G3, the next ball is S. (Lose.)

2 out of 3 chance your second ball is gold.

>>720124373
you don't understand basic probability. it's 1/2. you are fucking retarded.

>>720123996
Why is the box with 2 gold balls 1/3. That's not correct. That's not a correct way to solve the problem.

>>720124029
Wrong. It can be done repeatedly. If you repeat the experiment 100 times, how many times will you get 2 gold balls? That's a probability.

>>720124051
Please solve the problem or go read a book. It's the least you can do.

>>720124087
Wrong.

>>720124180
Lol, are you retarded?

>>720124198
Well then be puzzled upon you're own stupidity.

>>720124209
You can't discard your problem space.

File: 1377754802844.jpg (32KB, 508x595px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 508x595px

>>720124392
it must feel good to be as retarded and arrogant as you

ITS REALLY EASY ACTUALLY:

IF YOU HAVE THE GOLD, YOU'VE BEEN 1.
THEN YOU NEED ANOTHER GOLD!!!!!
HELLO?! ARE YOU UNDERSTANDING ME?!

YOU NEED 2 GOLDS AND YOU HAVE 3 SILVER IN ALL!!!

SO THE ANSWER IS 2/3

>>720124582
>Why is the box with 2 gold balls 1/3. That's not correct. That's not a correct way to solve the problem.
What the hell are you talking about? Nobody said anything like that.

>>720124582
just give up, you're retarded and don't understand basic maths. maybe call your local preschool and ask to talk with the class retard, he might be able to teach you something.

>>720124483

well set out. I don't see how anyone can disagree with this logic, but I'd like to see the stubborn people in this thread try

The following reasoning appears to give a probability of 1/2:

Originally, all three boxes were equally likely to be chosen.
The chosen box cannot be box SS.
So it must be box GG or GS.
The two remaining possibilities are equally likely. So the probability that the box is GG, and the other coin is also gold, is 1/2.

The flaw is in the last step. While those two cases were originally equally likely, the fact that you are certain to find a gold coin if you had chosen the GG box, but are only 50% sure of finding a gold coin if you had chosen the GS box, means they are no longer equally likely given that you have found a gold coin. Specifically:

The probability that GG would produce a gold coin is 1.
The probability that SS would produce a gold coin is 0.
The probability that GS would produce a gold coin is 1/2.

From wikipedia.

you have two boxes left. one has a gold ball, the other has a silver ball. thats 50%. you are a fucking mongoloid if you say otherwise

>>720122251
2/3 you fucking idiots

see the monty hall problem

>>720124271
These anons can't read.

>>720124276
You can't be this retarded. It's not the same as the Monty Hall problem. But, it is still a valid problem.

>>720124331
>>720124373
No, that is not correct. You have the right answer, but your intuition about the problem is wrong.

>>720124392
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand's_box_paradox

You're retarded

>>720124397
Sure.

>>720124464
Wrong.

>>720124483
Right.

>>720124515
Nope.

File: c5fc31a8920c94bd3994634a983ea47d1509448eac90a812d3d468666b7794ae.gif (993KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

993KB, 250x250px

>>720124515
it is in fact you who does not understand basic probability

>>720122327
This

>>720124845
it's 1/2 you fucking idiot. see basic fucking logic

It's 100% you fucking retards, where is my prize.

>>720124867
>>720124919
wow, you guys are fucking stupid

File: 1485190504293.jpg (43KB, 570x587px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 570x587px

>>720124934

>>720124867
You're an idiot. I said the same thing twice, and here are your rplies:

>>720124331 (You)
No, that is not correct. You have the right answer, but your intuition about the problem is wrong.

>>720124483 (You)
Right.

>>720125001
yup, that picture proves it. retard.

File: 1403204134939.jpg (9KB, 184x192px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 184x192px

>>720124999
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand's_box_paradox

read this (actually do it), come back and tell us we are stupid again

2 + 3 = 5

5 / 2 = 2,5

5 - 2 = 3

(2,5 - 0,5) / 3

==

2 / 3

>>720124654
That's the wrong intuition but the correct answer.

>>720124764
Yup and wiki specifically says in what you posted that, the reasoning leading to 1/2 is flawed. It then continues to state that the correct answer is 2/3.

The correct answer of
2
/
3
can also be obtained as follows:

Originally, all six coins were equally likely to be chosen.
The chosen coin cannot be from drawer S of box GS, or from either drawer of box SS.
So it must come from the G drawer of box GS, or either drawer of box GG.
The three remaining possibilities are equally likely, so the probability that the drawer is from box GG is
2
/
3
.
Alternatively, one can simply note that the chosen box has two coins of the same type
2
/
3
of the time. So, regardless of what kind of coin is in the chosen drawer, the box has two coins of that type
2
/
3
of the time. In other words, the problem is equivalent to asking the question "What is the probability that I will pick a box with two coins of the same color?".

>>720124845
It's not the same problem. Very similar but the way the conditional statement affects the problem space is different. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand's_box_paradox

>>720124867
i was right

>>720122251
50%
The probability is no longer between 3 boxes, but between a box that has 2 gold and a box that has 1 gold, one silver. As we know that we have drawn a gold ball, the box has equal chance of having either the gold or the silver ball left in the box for us to take next. The box of 2 silver balls doesn't play into this chance.

>>720125087
>>720125109
lol, you guys better not get too excited, your full time carers might take away your computer privileges

>>720124924
>>720124934
Wrong.

>>720124939
Wrong.

>>720125058
I misunderstood the when you said 2/3 coming from the first. A mistake often made with this problem is people do not consider it as 3 separate actions. Rather they just assume that if you ignore the third box. It is 2/3 because that's the number of gold balls left.

You are correct.

File: i_want_you____by_orionmadix-d7cecrn.jpg (42KB, 350x262px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 350x262px

>>720125076
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand's_box_paradox

this proves it, but be warned, reading this might disturb you. you might realise that your intuiton isn't always right and this might crush your pubescent worldview

>>720125109
Wrong.

>>720125134
Wrong.

>>720125232
wrong

>>720125058
of course i'm right
i'm brilliant

>>720125280
i'm not wrong.

i'm a professor in a university in istanbul

>>720125263
>REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
>REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAD
>REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAD WIKI
>REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEETARD

>>720125337
> University
> Istanbul

You mean high school in the Western world? If you answered 1/2 then you are not a professor.

File: 1382730573951.jpg (38KB, 477x720px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 477x720px

>>720125215
it's always fun to make arrogant idiots realise their idiocy. i would even argue that this is the most important social function of satire

>>720124764

>The two remaining possibilities are equally likely.

You are missing key information; that a gold ball was already pulled. This implies a higher chance that you pulled from the GG box.

>>720125404
no i'm the first one with 2/3

>>720125263
No one gives a fuck that you changed a wikipedia page faggot

>>720125433
Read his whole post. What he posted said that that 1/2 is flawed. Just read it. That anon is so stupid, he posted something to prove his point that disproves it.

>>720125454
This page was last modified on 13 December 2016, at 16:41.

File: 1328528198270.jpg (17KB, 211x211px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 211x211px

>>720125390

50/50 unless you are retarded and still wants to chose between all 3 boxes

File: 1306325995240.jpg (22KB, 211x227px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 211x227px

>>720125454
incredible

>>720122251
1/2 you hooked nose kike. 6 booals and HALF are gold.

>>720125447
Well your proof is wrong.

>>720125454
Lol get the tin foil hatssssss. Google the name of the problem.

>>720125503
That's some long term trollin

>>720125550
wrong.

>>720125597
Wrong.

>>720125603
I ain't gunna do shit faggot, I bet you rigged my google too

>>720125404
do you realise how stupid you sound? when the Monty Hall problem was first proposed, all the mathmaticians (people a lot smarter than you) disagreed with it. you're here spouting your obnoxious vitriol like you invented the fucking solution. you are nothing, you simply learned a problem to a solution. get over yourself.

>>720125747
I did. Everything is 2/3 in your life now. You're fucked.

>>720125603
My proof is not wrong!

i have already done more than 1 explanations on my youtube channel

File: 1333026798541.jpg (63KB, 240x320px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 240x320px

>>720125747
obvious troll is obvious

>>720122251
1/4

>>720122251
2/3 ez game ez lieaf

>>720125768
Ouch

BEFORE I READ ANY OTHER POST I POST MY OPINION:

i think that you can choose between 2 boxes.. so that would be 1/4... but you already have a gold.. soo that can be 1/8 ?!

The question is unanswerable

It implies you grab a box 'at random' but then says you definitely got a gold ball

This is a paradox, and impossible to answer correctly

>>720125996
kek

File: 242420-seaman2.jpg (19KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 640x480px

>>720125695
Your mom was wrong to recieve your fathers seaman

>>720125768
It's called scientific progress. Now we argue about AI probabilistic models instead of conditional probability models that have been solved.

It's just a tricky question to tricky people.
Who doesn't have seen probability more cautios in life won't get it at first.

You can translate the question to "knowing you got a gold ball, what the change of it been picked from box 1 ?" Still bayes

>>720125847
Ever since the first post baby

>>720125996
idiot.


you take a box and took a ball out of that....

and IF the ball is gold, how is the chance to get another one?

fagget

File: 1352019651699.jpg (37KB, 336x361px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 336x361px

>>720125984
>alternative facts

i think you should run for american president, i would vote for you

>>720122251
The answer is 50% or 1/2. Since the ball you took was gold, you can discard the box with silver balls as it is impossible that is the box you chose. So now the two possible boxes are the gold and silver box, and the gold and gold box. Remove 1 gold from each box (because you took a gold out) and now u have either silver or gold. 50%.

>>720124483
I cant understand WHY G2 and G1 have to be unrelated instances. The question is what's the probability of picking another gold ball if you picked a gold one in the first place, so it wouldn't matter which one of the golden balls in the box with 2 of them you took.

Just asking, don't be hostile.

File: n5Ijh9S.gif (687KB, 256x192px) Image search: [Google]

687KB, 256x192px

>>720126134
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand's_box_paradox

it's your choice:
1. become a little bit wiser today
2. continue embracing the dunning-kruger effect

it does not take long to read that article

>>720122251
It's a 50/50 chance. The box has another yellow ball or it doesnt.

thATs it

>>720122251
33.333 repeating percent chance

File: 1376433422576.jpg (46KB, 600x393px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 600x393px

>>720126316
>all those scientists with their theories, they just want to confuse us hardworking good people
>yfw

>>720125984
incredible

>>720126046
nothing you say can change the fact that you are an abrasive niggard. you are here to prove to yourself that you are better than everybody, when in fact you've proven yourself to be lesser.

>>720123195
So there are 2 gold balls in the second one?
Retard

>>720126441
why? that seems right to me, too.

The question is flawed. If i grabbed a ball from the box and its gold im gonna run and sell the gold for money before the expirement is over and you take the balls back.

Or alternitively. Take all three boxes and run

>>720123195
If you pulled a gold ball from the second one there's only a silver one left. Thus 50% chance.

>>720122251
The question never tells you if you put the ball back or not.

If not: 50%
If you replace it: 75%

>>720122251
This shitstorm again. Since amerifags in particular but pretty much everyone is illitterate in maths and won't "believe" a correct proof, i'll put it in a way so that those who say 50% realise they're wrong.
Say you have a box with 1 million gold balls, another one with 1 million silver balls, and a third one with 999999 silver balls and 1 gold ball.
You extract a gold ball from one random box. Even a retarded dog can understand that the possibility is waaaay over 50% to have picked it from the all gold box (with these numbers it's about 99.999%). Now take one ball from every box, you'll still admit it doesn't change the fact that it's not 50%. Keep doing it. Eventually you'll have 3 balls per box, GGG, GSS, SSS. It is easy to see that the chance is way higher for the G ball to come from the first box. Take out one last ball, the result won't suddenly shift to 50%. This is not a rigorous proof, but it gives the idea of why you're wrong. 2/3 is the right answer.
If this still doesn't convince you, try it yourself. Take 4 coins, mark 3 with an X.
Put two of those with the X together in a glass and the other two (one marked, one not marked) in another. Mix them up and then pick a random coin from one. If it has the X, check the other one in the same glass. Do it 20-30ish times and you'll see that in about 2/3 of the attempts the X coin will come from a glass with he other marked coin in it. The reason is simply that you'll pick each glass 50% of the times, but every time you'll pick the unmarked coin, the extraction won't count an you'll just put it back in, because we only care about extraction of the marked coin.

>>720126300
While I am pretty stoned I can see where they are coming from. There was a 50% chance I'd have drawn the silver ball from the g/s box therefore it is less likely I drew from that box.

>>720126443
People usually get mad when their idiocy is exposed. It's okay just go back to living in your bubble of ignorance.

>>720126599
If it doesn't say it then don't assume it. The question also doesn't state whether or not a car comes in and kills you while simultaneously Moses grants you 30 gold balls that fall directly on your face. Fucking idiot. Both of your answers are wrong regardless.

File: 1359394006219.gif (2MB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 320x240px

>>720122251
it used to be in these threads that there were some people admitting that their intuition was wrong. those always gave me hope for humanity.

>>720126848
Yeah and that's respectable. No one knows everything, and no one will be able to have the correct intuition about a tricky problem every single time.

What interests me is the willful cognitive block that people use to avoid hurting their ego.

>>720126284
Maybe this will help: The initial conditions assume you drew a gold. You're drawing blindly, so you could end up with any of the three gold balls. There are three gold balls, so there's a 1 in 3 chance of drawing any one of them.

That's what matters. Because in the second step, you're just looking at the ball you already drew (1 of the 3 golds). It doesn't really matter which box it came from, just what the OTHER ball in the box is. And if you iterate through all the possibilities (all 3 gold balls), 2 out of 3 times the other ball is gold.

>>720126848
Even in this thread, a couple people have admitted they didn't understand, or that they made a mistake.

Which is an admirable thing.

>>720126610
Ohh I get it m8, thanks

>>720126798
i never actually put an answer forward, you are falsely assuming i got the answer wrong. you claiming that the people who answered wrong are idiots makes you look like the king of idiots. you can dish out criticism, but you can't take any. you are a coward. as i said in an earlier post, the entire mathematical community disagreed with the monty hall problem when it was put forward. think about that for a second. now think how stupid you sound calling anonymous people on the internet "mongoloids" and "retards" for coming to the same conclusion as them. get over yourself, you learned some trivia, you are not smart for knowing this.

50% theres 2 colors either gold or silver

File: 140812081344-zalmay-khalilzad-fred-pleitgen-amanpour-interview-iraq-u-s-maliki-00061711-horizontal-gallery.jpg (32KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 640x360px

>>720127664
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand's_box_paradox

File: 1485204483079.jpg (43KB, 608x380px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 608x380px

>>720127199
The boxes make this orders of magnitude harder. I was confused because I was thinking:

Since you already took a gold ball that means box 3 is eliminated. You now have 2 eligible boxes. Since one box has one gold ball and one silver and the other one has two gold balls I was calculating the probability of choosing the all-gold box instead.

I always count the two separate inverted instances as one (GB1 and GB2 in the all gold box should be differentiated and counted as different scenarios)

Thanks man

File: 1338560243937.gif (2MB, 350x262px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 350x262px

>>720127576
not the guy you were arguing with

i think you missed that you are on 4chan and not on reddit. this is not some safespace where patronizing idiots spouting bs get a free pass from being called names.

you are the cancer that is killing my /b/

>>720122327
This is correct, one of the few non-retards.

File: 1337275481776.jpg (12KB, 251x251px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 251x251px

>>720128542
well done man, you showed all those mathematicians who say otherwise

>>720128273
i've likely been here longer than you, kiddo. and in this case, context is important. when someone pretends to be better than someone on /b/, they need to be brought down to earth. you claim i was defending the people he was berating, when in fact i was dishing out criticism to someone who thinks he's king dick. check yourself before you claim im the cancer killing /b/ you one-dimentional faggot. i was being meta, you were being cancer.

File: image.jpg (19KB, 226x225px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 226x225px

>>720122979
Fuck off you faggot cunt, the first given fact is that you've grabbed one golden ball. There is no probability in this as of now. This does mean, the third box, the two silver ones, is excluded.

Now, probability plays a role. There's two possible boxes.

P(2nd ball gold)=1/2=0.5, or 50%

>>720127771

It's a slight variation of this paradox.

"The 'paradox' is in the probability, after choosing a box at random and withdrawing one coin at random, if that happens to be a gold coin, of the next coin also being a gold coin."

In the example above, you're not taking it from the same box. The majority of the answers here is wrong, especially those who think it's 2/3.

>>720128090
Yes, it always seems to be the boxes that trip people up.

>>720122721
>Even if there are a million lottery tickets there are only two options: you either win the jackpot or you don't.

File: 1307766601970s.jpg (26KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 480x360px

>>720129019
am i right to assume that you also believe that mohammed rode to the moon on a winged donkey?

this is just a guess based on the way you seem to fail at logic

>>720129019
Yes you are: it literally uses the phrase "same box".

File: slack-imgs.com.jpg (508KB, 1536x1536px) Image search: [Google]

508KB, 1536x1536px

>>720128861
>i've likely been here longer than you, kiddo.
stopped reading right there

look, idiot, you can go on screeching about people calling other people names as long as you want if it makes you feel better. in this case at least the people being called names are actually factually wrong

you start with:
GG GS SS

you pull a G
the 3rd box falls away as not relevant, you are left with either:

GG xS
or
Gx GS

in either situation, there are 2 gold balls and 1 silver ball remaining. 2/3 odds to pull a gold ball. Whether you pick from the same box again isn't really relevant.

It depends on how you interpret the question.

"What is the probability that, picking a box at random, you pull out a gold and then another gold"

or

"What is the specific probability of getting another gold after having drawn one gold"

If it's the second question, it's 50%.

>>720129583
if you draw 1 gold you eliminate the box with 2 silvers and thus there are 2 golds and a silver remaining, 2/3rds odds to pull another gold.

>>720122251

2/5 chance you dumb dumbs.

>>720129488
>stopped reading right there
no, you didn't, you just can't think of a rebuttal. you are pathetic.

>>720122919

lol wow..

ok let me help..

Fuck the boxes.

There are 6 balls. 3 gold, 3 silver.

there is a 3/6 chance (50% to pull a gold pall at the start.

After pulling a gold ball there are 5 balls.

2 of the 5 remaining balls are gold.

you have a 2/5 chance to pull a gold ball..

people in here are creepy dumb..

either way it's pretty amazing seeing you people whether educated or not so quick to talk shit and call everyone else a dumbfuck lol

everyone in this thread basically is cancer gj being incapable of rational dialogue and connecting with others

>>720129670

Nope.

You believe there are three options: gold, gold, or silver.

That is not true, though. There are actually only two options, either your hand is in the box with two golds (and hence, the other ball in the box is gold), or your hand is in the silvergold box and the other ball is silver.

There are two options, not three.

>>720129899
there aren't 5 balls after a gold ball pull because you know you aren't picking from the box with 2 silvers in it, thus you must be pulling from either the double gold or the silver/gold box - 3 balls remaining (2 of which are gold).

>>720128912
[1G2G] [3G4S] [5S6S]

These are your boxes. Now there are six ways you can pick a box and remove two balls in order:

1,2 (G,G)
2,1 (G,G)
3,4 (G,S)
4,3 (S,G)
5,6 (S,S)
6,5 (S,S)

When you pick a box and remove a ball, you're committed to that box and that ball. So the ball you pick first completely determines which ball you'll pick second. There's no way to draw ball three then get ball two; there's no way to draw ball three then get anything but ball four.

So we know you drew ball 1, 2, or 3 (because the ball you drew was gold). This means you absolutely have to get ball 2, 1, or 4. Balls 2,1 and 4 are G, G, and S, which means you have a 2/3 chance of having picked a ball that guarantees you will get a second gold ball, and a 1/3 chance of having picked a ball that guarantees you get the silver one.

The second ball you get isn't even a probability thing: you already rolled for it when you picked the first ball.

File: 1355598700069.png (45KB, 159x219px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 159x219px

>>720129905
holy shit, another tumblr faggot?

i think that you and this guy should get a room
>>720129717


idiots deserve to be called out for what they are

Answer: 50%
Saved all of you from a bunch of retards.

>>720130000

The boxes are the trick. Ignore the fucking boxes. Pretend they are all in one big bag.

>>720122251
50%

File: 1306326455111.jpg (35KB, 700x535px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 700x535px

>>720130095
thanks man, your great arguments convinced me

>>720122251
66.6%?

>>720130073
they're gonna stay idiots unless you show them why they're wrong

File: 1229480872982.jpg (106KB, 546x636px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 546x636px

>>720130196
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand's_box_paradox

>>720129962
Well that's Bertrand's Paradox (that it seems to be 1/2) but it doesn't actually work out like that mathematically or in practice.

From the wiki:
>Since we know his probability is
2
/
3
, not
1
/
2
, we have an apparent paradox. It can be resolved only by recognizing how the combination of "observing a gold coin" with each possible box can only affect the probability that the box was GS or SS, but not GG.

>>720130073
lol fool i been on 4chan since it first split from SA

i don't care how you act, im just telling you that acting like this = mental illness or something lol

>>720130248
why ?

>>720130103
Uh but that's not how the question is constructed. If you have to pick from the same box again you *know* it isn't the double silver box thus those 2 balls aren't being counted in the odds.

>>720130073
>>720130236
your ad hominem is leaking out.

File: 1327512810821.jpg (20KB, 400x295px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 400x295px

>>720130394

>>720130394
The Paradox is that it *seems to be* 1/2 odds logically but in reality/math doesn't work out like that (because it is 2/3rds actually).

thus you have all the btards on here screaming about beta faggots not knowing basic logic (bc they think it is 1/2 and it is obviously so)

its 2/3 you fucking idiots.

you eliminate box 3 because only has silver. you have 1 gold ball in your hand and 3 possible remaining balls of unknown color, 2 of which are gold. 2 of 3 unknown balls are gold = 2/3 chance

66.6%

>>720130516
no, it's 2/3 idiot

Anyway the right answer has been posted with both a math proof (which prolly isn't helpful to anyone who doesn't already know it but anyway) and in plain english with wiki sources so at this point we're just slinging shit and ima go back to fapping

>>720129583
It's not 50%, because the second ball isn't a roll.

If you pick one ball from a box, you are 100% guaranteed to get the other ball from the box. You will never get any ball other than the other ball in the box. You're not picking boxes at all; that's a decoy to lead you to the wrong answer. You're actually picking one of the six balls to pull out first, and then the ball you get second 100% depends on which ball you got first.

Therefore:
If you pick the silver ball in the middle box or either gold ball in the first box, you're guaranteed to get a gold ball second.
If you pick the gold ball in the middle box or either silver ball in the last box, you're guaranteed to get a silver ball second.

Because the ball you picked was gold, we know it's not the silver ball from the middle box or either ball from the last box. Two of the balls you could have picked will guarantee you a gold ball, and one of the balls you could have picked will guarantee you a silver ball.

2:1 is 66%

This is simple you have a 50% chance of grabbing a good or silver ball at this point you are guaranteed to have either the two fold out the gold and silver because you've already grabbed one gold ball so you have a 50/50 chance that it's going to be the gold ball or the silver ball

>>720130578
its 4/6 you fucking buffoon

50/50 chance

the people here cant read.The answer is 100%

File: mby.png (41KB, 706x564px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 706x564px

????????

>>720129670

In the problem of the coins, this makes sense. In this problem, so far it doesn't seem to make sense to me. Because I didn't understand the problem of the coins at the beginning, I'm cautious this time.

Anyhow: the question here is the opposite. It doesn't ask "what's the chance you draw a gold ball, and then another gold ball?". You KNOW you have drawn a gold ball already. Therefore, you could be in either box. So you either draw a gold ball, or not.

>>720130679
first of all 2/3 you fucking cunt

second pulling the first ball as gold eliminates the silver silver box so you have one of 2 boxes, a gold gold or a gold silver, thus you have a 1 in 2 chance (50% 50/50, however you faggots wanna put it)

>>720122251
The government is monitoring your online activity http://traineddog.club

>>720122251
50/50

>>720131081
"What is the probability that the next ball you take from the same box will also be gold?"

Easiest way to understand these problems is to try them yourself. Just like the 3 door problem.

GG -- GS -- SS

If you reach into GS, there's a 50% chance of getting the gold. But, there's a 100% chance of getting a gold ball from GG. But since we know that we got a gold ball, that means it's more likely that you reached into GG than GS.

The options are as follows:

1. Reach into GG, get G. (Win)
2. Reach into GG, get other G. (Win)
3. Reach into GS, get G. (Lose)

3 options, each with 1/3 chance of happening based on the setup of the problem, right? So 2/3 times, you end up with a gold ball.

>>720131251
I think you're overcomplicating it.

>>720131081
But one box gives you a 100% chance for a gold ball, so you end up in that box more.

>>720129670
this would be true if the odds were based on balls (heh) rather than the box but they aren't (if they were all 3 would be in one box but you would also still have the silvers thus it would be 2/5 chances) the odds however are based on the boxes themselves and after pulling the gold and eliminating the double silver leaves you with, as explained, 2 chances of you have the gold/gold and the gold/silver box

thus its 1/2 not 2/3

>>720130478
so 2/3 because there are 3 boxes and
there are 2 boxes with golden balls ?

>>720123473
Techincally, it's not that far off. The probability that you'd draw from the 1G1S box is ½. The probability you'd draw gold from the 2G box is 1. The probability of the 2S box is 0.
That's literally what it says in the wiki.

>>720131081
Man I have to get a two-headed and a two-tailed coin. I'd make bank.

You guys are all getting confused because of the boxes. The boxes are mathematically identical to the coins: if you pick one ball (face) in one box (coin), you absolutely have to then get the other ball that was in the box (other side of the coin).

The problem can be rephrased as
"You have three coins: one has two heads, one has two tails, and one is a normal coin. You pick one without looking, toss it without looking, and when you look down, you see the coin is heads-up. What are the chances that, when you turn it over, the other side will be a head?"
and would be exactly the same problem.

>>720131251
Yep 2/3. Agreed

>>720131251

You can either get a silver or a gold ball next, so it's 50/50

>>720130847

Yes. It's clear to me now:

- There are three boxes.
- You drew one gold ball.
- This means you are in Box 1 or Box 2.
- If you are in Box 1, you can only draw a gold ball.
- If you are in Box 2, you can only draw a silver ball.

If the question was:

"What was the chance I drew a gold ball from these two boxes?"

Then the answer would obviously be 3/4 chance. Because there are, indeed, four possible results: a gold ball, another gold ball, yet another gold ball, and a silver ball.

But this is not the scenario the question asks, but rather "okay, you've got a gold ball in your hand: what's the chance you take a gold ball from the SAME box?"

>>720122251
Chance of your two ball having the same colour : 2/3 (two boxes vs one mixed)
Chance of your ball being gold : 1/2 (three gold, three sllver)
Therefore, the solution is 1/3

File: 2 out of 3.png (190KB, 685x1600px) Image search: [Google]

190KB, 685x1600px

>>720130847

2/3

>>720131507
Answer is 2/3

>>720131464
pulling a gold eliminates ss box so theres really only 2

>>720131502
No, because 2/3 times you're in the GG box. More likely to be in GG, more likely to get gold.

>>720131680
Correct

File: 5Mvr4A7.png (238KB, 461x319px) Image search: [Google]

238KB, 461x319px

>>720131680
alternative facts RREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

>>720131519
No, it's 2/3

>>720131830
I have no idea how this works so i kill myself but thanks for answering my stupid questions

>>720131464
No, it's 2/3 because there are six balls, and 2/6 of them are in the same box as another gold ball (this is where the "2/" comes from), and three of them are silver so you can't have picked them.

so 2/(6-3) = 2/3.

If you added another box with two silver balls, there'd be 8 balls total, 2 gold balls sharing with another gold ball, and 5 silver balls, so
it would be 2/(8-5) = still 2/3

If you added another box with one ball each, there'd be 8 balls total, 2 gold ball sharing with another gold ball, and 4 silver balls, so 2/(8-4) = 2/4 = 1/2.

>>720131341

That's the mistake. The question, just like the coin question, has unnecessary information. The third box is pointless. It doesn't matter. I have a gold ball already. I know I'm in either box 1, or box 2. Now, if I have a gold ball in my hand, the remaining ball is either a gold ball (Box 1) or a silver ball (Box 2).

IF there were three balls in each box, three golds in one, two golds and one silver in another, the answer would be different.

>>720131491

I understand what you mean. But, in my opinion, that isn't what the question is asking.

It's similar to the Monty Hall problem with the donkeys. We all know it is better to switch, but if one shuffles the doors it's a 50% chance you find the car or not.

>>720131680
>There are people who actually believe this

>>720122251
50% You are either taking balls from the box with 2 gold balls or you are not.

>>720132170
I think i understand this now

Thanks

GG GS SS

pick G

XG GS
2 golds left
1 silver left

2/3 chance, r-right?

itt: people arguing over which balls to grab

>>720131680
But you've already drawn a gold from one of the boxes, then it is 50/50 wheter it was from the box with the golds or the one with a gold and a silver.

>>720132389
1 2 3
GG GS SS
pick 1 of 3
take G from 1 or 2
IF G was taken from 1, 1 now has XG
IF G was taken from 2, 2 now has XS
take second ball from 1 or 2 (whichever you were in before)
it can either be G or S
1/2

>>720132459
What do you expect, this is /b/...

>>720131507
You've already drawn a gold ball from one of the boxes, that means it can be two of the three boxes. Two choices = 50/50
This is how I was taught math. Am I missing something? Am I bad at english and not understanding?

>>720132185
Say we get rid of box three entirely. The scenario is still exactly the same: either

- you chose ball 1 (and will get ball 2); WIN
- you chose ball 2 (and will get ball 1): WIN
- you chose ball 3 (and will get ball 4): LOSE

There now one thing we know didn't happen:

- you chose ball 4 (and will get ball 3): YOU DIDN'T GET A SILVER BALL

WIN/WIN/LOSE is 2/3 or 66.6%
No matter how many or how few boxes with only silver balls you have.

>>720132170
you are retarded. There are only 4 balls. Just because you can still see the other two doesn't mean they are not exactly like a number that you scratched off an algebra question and then forgot about because your teacher told you to simplify the question.

>>720132665
You don't have any choices, because you always get the ball that shares a box with the one you already picked.

You determined which ball you'd get second when you chose the ball you'd get first.

There are six balls in total:
1:WIN
2:WIN
3:LOSE
4:SILVER (WIN)
5:SILVER (LOSE)
6:SILVER (LOSE)

We know you didn't pick a silver ball, so it's either WIN, WIN, or LOSE; this is 2/3.

>>720132700
The first criteria gets rid of box 3 entirely, so of course it is the same, still your 'logic' is wrong.

| GOLD GOLD | GOLD SILVER |

Now you take one out of these boxes, that one is a golden one, there now are two possible scenarios:
1: | GOLD EMPTY | GOLD SILVER |
2: | GOLD GOLD | EMTPY SILVER |
Now, depending on which box you first picked the golden ball from, you either get a golden ball (Scenario 1) or you get a silver ball (Scenario 2).

>>720132487
For the first draw, it doesn't matter whether you drew from the box with the golds or the box with a gold or a silver. It just matters that you drew a gold. And for the second draw, the odds are 2:1 that the gold you already have came from the gold/gold box, so there's a 2/3 chance the other ball in the box is gold.

>>720132788
You're not picking anything in the second round, you just get the ball that comes with the ball you picked in the first round.

So however many balls are "left" for you to "pick from" in the second round doesn't matter, because there is no second round and you always, 100% of the time, unavoidably, get the roomie of the ball you picked in the first round.

>>720133265
Good way of putting it.

>>720133023
But it said in OPs picture that you had picked up a golden ball. There are two boxes that contain at least one gold ball. SO it has to be one of them.
Since you've taken out a gold ball.
It means there is either a silver or a gold.
That's 50% chance.

File: asasa.jpg (25KB, 539x316px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 539x316px

>>720132700
>>720132665
>>720132185

OHHHHHHHHH I GOT IT NOW.

Basically, there was a 2/3 chance that if I took a Gold ball, I landed on Box 1, since it had the higher amount of gold balls.

Hence there's a bigger chance I will grab another Gold ball.

>>720133127
You're missing
3: [EMPTY GOLD] [GOLD SILVER]
and
4: [GOLD GOLD] [GOLD EMPTY]<<--we know this didn't happen because you're not holding a silver ball

>>720133533

I forgot to say "disregard picture".

>>720132185
It's not a mistake, it is exactly the point. You either chose ball A from the gold/gold box, ball B from the gold/gold box, or ball A from the gold/silver box. That gives you a 2 out of 3 chance that you're in gold/gold.

>>720133533
>>720133587
The pic's nonsense, but otherwise correct.

why doesn't someone just do the fucking experiment (or write a program to do it 1000 times) and see how many times it works?

>>720133533
It makes some sort of sense, but only slightly. Why does the chances of the first ball matter? That isn't in the OPs question. You've already taken out a ball.

>>720122251
2/3

>>720133380
The three golden balls are 1, 2, and 3.
All you know if you're holding a golden ball is that you're holding either ball 1, ball 2, or ball 3.

YOU ALWAYS GET SECOND THE OTHER BALL FROM THE SAME BOX.

YOU NEVER GET ANY OTHER BALL.

So if you're holding ball 1 you'll get ball 2; if you're holding ball 2 you'll get ball 1, and if you're holding ball 3 you'll get ball 4.

So if you pick ball 1 first you always win, if you pick ball 2 first you always win, and if you pick ball 3 first you always lose.

WIN:WIN:LOSE is 2/3.

>>720122251
50/50

File: ball.jpg (334KB, 701x576px) Image search: [Google]

334KB, 701x576px

>>720122251
3 options
>I have ball A in my hand
>I have ball B in my hand
>I have ball C in my hand

3 options, two of them will result in my next pull being a gold ball. 66.67% chance the next ball is gold. All other answers are either trolls or legitimate idiots.

>>720133774
Reread: there's a 2/3 chance that IF you have a gold ball, the box you picked was box 1.

This is because there's a 3/3 chance you picked ball 1, 2 or 3; and therefore a 2/3 chance you picked ball 1 or ball 2 (box 1) and only a 1/3 chance you picked ball 3 (box 2).

>>720133547
your third case is the same as my first...

>>720134674
Because two are the same as your first, but only one is the same as your second, that's where the 2:1 comes from.

>>720133758
Good idea, but you don't even have to actually write the program to see it comes out to 2/3. Your code would look something like this:

>pick a random number from 1-3
>if it's 3 (silver/silver), do nothing and pick again
>if it's 1 (gold/gold) add one to the total goldBallPicked, add one to the total goldGoldPicked
>if it's 2 (gold/silver), pick a random number from 1-2
>if it's 1 (gold), add a total to goldBallPicked, add a total to goldSilverPicked
>if it's 2 (silver) do nothing and pick again

See how you add to goldGoldPicked 100% of the time you are in it, and to goldSilverPicked only 50% of the time you are in it? That right there is 2/3.

absolutely 75%
but i can't be bothered to explain

>>720135149
Impossible to explain, because it's not 75%.

>>720133774

Right. I thought so too as well. But you have to remember that Gold ball got to you somehow. And that somehow is "you had 2 out of 3 possibilities to land in the box with 2 gold balls".

In other words, it is more likely you are in the gold box than not. The answer is still "the next ball is either gold or silver", which is true. But the real question is "what are the ODDS the next ball is gold?". And the odds are stacked in Gold's favor.

File: proof.jpg (196KB, 1074x651px) Image search: [Google]

196KB, 1074x651px

i know this code is so badly written but here is definitive proof of 2/3, which tbh i didnt think it was at first

>>720135684
>pythonfag

give up on programming, you're not cut out for it.

>>720135974

cant tell if you're serious or just joking because i used a noobish language

>>720135684
Secdond either sounds like a conspiracy theory or a dinosaur.

>>720136180
people get very snobbish about programming languages

not realizing binary is the one true language

01101001 00100000 01101100 01101001 01100101 01100100 00101100 00100000 01100010 01100001 01110011 01101001 01100011 00100000 01101001 01110011 00100000 01110100 01101000 01100101 00100000 01101111 01101110 01100101 00100000 01110100 01110010 01110101 01100101 00100000 01101100 01100001 01101110 01100111 01110101 01100001 01100111 01100101

>>720122251
You either will or you won't so 1/2. If you grabbed a gold ball already then the box with no gold balls is irrelevant. Therefore, you will either grab a gold ball or you wont

>>720122251
66,666666666666~%

>>720136368
6d 61 63 68 69 6e 65 20 63 6f 64 65 20 6f 72 20 64 69 65

It's 2/3

There are 6 balls, lets number them 1 to 6

You randomly choose a box and draw a random ball. This has 6 possible outcomes:

Ball 1 from the GG box
Ball 2 from the GG box
Ball 3 from the GS box
Ball 4 from the GS box
Ball 5 from the SS box
Ball 6 from the SS box

We know it's not option 4, 5 or 6, because the ball is not silver. 3 options remain, 2 of which will result in a 2nd gold ball

>>720137358
>01110100 01101000 01101001 01101110 01101011 01110011 00100000 01101000 01100101 01111000 00100000 01101001 01110011 00100000 01101101 01100001 01100011 01101000 01101001 01101110 01100101 00100000 01100011 01101111 01100100 01100101

File: mc.png (11KB, 652x200px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 652x200px

>>720137744

>>720122251
There was a monte carlo done for this in an earlier thread. Posting link:

https://gist.github.com/mustangflyer/47f323a9482f594fc924f61d20e6d104

>>720138104
General dictionaries aren't very good with technical terms. Computers process in 0s and 1s (or offs and ons, or any other representation of a switch). Hex is a way to present those 0s and 1s in a more compact, more human-friendly way. But it's still a layer on top.