erik, we are frustrated - Chess Forums - Page 44

AlCzervik · 2019-09-25T01:42:19-07:00

yep, this is to the owner. so that he might get an idea of how some things here piss us off. there have been numerous topics in the past few months about autobots, new "features", and we receive many responses, but never an explanation from a staff member that explains anything. complaints

duntcare

Sep 18, 2020

0

#861

RUSSIAN

llama

Sep 18, 2020

0

#862

GMproposedsolutions wrote:

llama wrote:

GMproposedsolutions wrote:

There are different approaches, one is to consider the complement. Now what is not clear is the 8th card being the only card completing a set and the ONLY card completing whereas before the 8th card there as no set, meaning 4,5,6,7,8,15,1 for example have been picked and then the 8th card is a "3". This is crucial. Logic must never be suppressed.

I probably phrased it poorly.

Let's say 35 cards are blank, and 5 cards have a star (the deck totals 40 cards). A person draws from a shuffled deck until they have all 5 star cards. After they have all 5 they stop and the game is over.

What is the probability that the game ends after the 8th card is drawn?

that's an entirely different question and one that is easier to solve. vastly different. this reduces somewhat to a keno type of problem.

Yeah, I think it's simple... and probably especially simple for someone like you

It's about as hard as finding the probability for normal card game stuffs like the probability of being dealt a royal flush in poker. Probably most beginner level statistic students could do this after one class.

llama

Sep 18, 2020

0

#863

Ripley_Osbourne wrote:

. . .

Ultimately, even all what is printed on paper, and even what is painte don walls shall perish, for time spares no one and nothing.

Now, that being said, what do we do? Do we begin now to live as if nothing matters because it'll be all gone in the end and who cares anyway? Or do we keep it up with the idea, future generations should be given witnesses of what we've done, of how we think how we feel and so on?

It's a complicated question

. . .

Well, it's partly a matter of perspective. Sure given an arbitrarily large time frame entire cultures die. Not only nations, but things like language and religions too.

So what does it mater? Well shorten your time frame. It matters very much to the people living it. Actions have real consequences. The consequences need not be eternal to give them weight.

That's one way of answering it.

TheBestBeer_Root

Sep 18, 2020

0

#864

hey llama

Phantom_Beast23

Sep 18, 2020

0

#865

ok

AlCzervik

Sep 18, 2020

0

#866

gentlemen! ladies! some pertinent posts here.

along with what some have accurately described as posts from children. please stop with those.

this is a topic that has the ear of the site owner where we can bring site issues directly to him. please don't ruin it.

TheBestBeer_Root

Sep 18, 2020

0

#867

TheBestBeer_Root :

Yes dude... sorry, just wanted to say hey to llama

Chat request sent

AlCzervik

Sep 18, 2020

0

#868

it happens. conversations evolve. i've started many topics where others chime in and the ebb and flow takes it to a place where the original title/thoughts have been passed by or have ended.

no issue there.

here, though, it is. of all the topics that are tongue in cheek (and i've posted many myself), this is not one of them.

AlCzervik

Sep 18, 2020

0

#869

GMproposedsolutions wrote:

llama wrote:

By the way, my answer is this.

The way my brain works is I want to first determine the state of holding 7 cards, 4 of which are stars. So I do the permutation 7p4 which is 840. This is my numerator, i.e. the winning states.

We divide this by the total number of states of 7 cards -- which for a deck of 40 is:

40*39*38*37*36*35*34

Then the chance of the 8th card being a star is 1 in 33.

So it's 840 / (40*39*38*37*36*35*34*33)

I posted the path in working with 52 cards as the original problem was posed, with correction but in using a total of 40 cards and the rest the same:

35C3*5C4/40C7*1/33=35/658008, different than 840 / (40*39*38*37*36*35*34*33)=1/3691424880

had the second portion been more complicated, the form used would be:

35C3*5C4/40C7 * 33C0*1C1/33C1

please make a different topic about your math problem(s).

llama

Sep 18, 2020

0

#870

The denominator 40C7 makes sense because that's all the different ways you can draw 7 cards out of 40 (order not mattering).

And I can see 35C3 is because out of 35 blank cards you want 3
And I can see 5C4 is because out of 5 star cards you want 4

But we don't draw from a stack of 35 and then a stack 5 independently. They're mixed together.

So you can count the instances of drawing 3 blank cards (3C7) and put that as the numerator (and then do the probability of 8th card NOT being a star)

Or you can count the instances of drawing 4 star cards (4C7) and put that as the numerator (and then do the probability of the 8th card being a star)

In both cases the denominator is 7C40 but the numerator is, I think, never 35C3 and 5C4 multiplied together.

@AlCzervik sorry bro. AFAIK me and GMproposed have both blocked each other so this is the easiest way to do it.

llama

Sep 19, 2020

0

#871

Well, lets do it with a known value to check the method. Lets calculate the chance of being dealt a royal flush in poker.

5C0 / 52C5

Gives the probability for 1 suit. Then multiply by 4 since there are 4 different ways to do it.

In other words it's never something like 5C1*5C*15C1*5C1*5C1 / 52C5

llama

Sep 19, 2020

0

#872

GMproposedsolutions wrote:

no more of this here.

ok, and FWIW I unblocked you

llama

Sep 19, 2020

0

#873

Ah, my settings might be messed up so you can't message me.

edit

Ok, I tired a different case with a known value. Your method worked and mine didn't. Now that I look at it your answer makes sense. I'm glad I asked.

AlCzervik

Sep 19, 2020

0

#874

llama wrote:

@AlCzervik sorry bro. AFAIK me and GMproposed have both blocked each other so this is the easiest way to do it.

this is why blocking sucks. not that there are times it is needed.

you and he have taken what appears to be a previous conversation about a math problem, which would normally pique my interest, into a topic about site issues.

i appreciate you apologizing, but it is not necessary. i've only read you here for about ten years, going back to the orangehonda account (always loved that handle)

rishabh11great

Sep 19, 2020

0

#875

I am Sorry

AlCzervik

Sep 19, 2020

0

#876

rishabh11great wrote:

BTW, I am at 2999 points !

this is not the topic to get virtual adoration based on points.

Infidel_Catto

Sep 19, 2020

0

#877

do they have beds of nails in India with that many points ? could be one with acupuncture needles.

badenwurtca

Sep 19, 2020

0

#878

erik wrote:

badenwurtca wrote:

Yes I also feel that the system needs to be improved. For example it might be possible to put some sort of a time limit on the power of the auto-bots. That is to say if something comes to the attention of an auto-bot regarding a member who has been here more than say 2 years ( or 3 years ? ) then instead of muting the said member perhaps the auto-bot could forward the problem to a human-mod ? The mod could then carefully review things and decide if muting really needs to happen. Just a thought.

We do something like this.

--- Thanks for the info Erik.

badenwurtca

Sep 19, 2020

0

#879

llama wrote:

batgirl wrote:

erik wrote:

I understand the comment now. This is a hard issue. It's challenging enough already to deal with the amount of spam, abuse, cheating, and poor behavior from how many members we have, but to then go in and mark their comments as keep, remove, keep, remove, keep, etc - we just can't do all of that. If someone creates a great blog post or forum, but then goes on to verbally abuse 10 of their opponents - we just can't handle the nuance of deciding that some of their content should stay. In an ideal world with unlimited resources, sure, I think that makes sense. But it's just an impossibility at this point.

My suggestion is: if someone is closed, and you think their content deserves to remain active on the site, please reach out to our support team to let us know and we can evaluate. I'm sorry that we don't have an easier solution for this at this time.

That was pretty much my suggestion. Self-closing after a mute creates a situation where that former-member's content is hidden. Generally a member whose content is worthwhile is also savvy enough to know this will happen if he closes their account rather than just leave without closing the account. Additionally, members who get muted and close their accounts, but while here provided such quality content or even comments witty or helpful enough that their content should be preserved are so few and far between that a simple request to unmute their account seems a reasonable solution to a very minor and rare issue.

The concept of being valuable to the community is itself absurd. Ghost_of_pushwood's posts should be preserved? Why? The days of witty comments being appreciated by adult members is long gone.

How old are are the people here? 6, 7, 8?

https://www.chess.com/forum/view/off-topic/how-old-are-yall?

As old as 9?

It's literally a daycare. Low effort posts dominate.

How can you tell? Just search for low effort posts via this handy link:

https://www.chess.com/forum/hot-topics

Where you quickly find that the majority of chess.com's forum posts are 5 words or less i.e.

https://www.chess.com/forum/view/off-topic/king-of-the-ladder?page=6373#last_comment

---

So I have to disagree with @erik.

This is not a "challenging" topic. The forums are for children... and not just children, but young children. The idea of preserving clever posts, particularly posts that are deemed clever by an old man such as @alczervik is laughable. There is no community here, not for anyone whose age happens to be as high as double digits.

--- Some good points !

llama

Sep 19, 2020

0

#880

badenwurtca wrote:

llama wrote:

batgirl wrote:

erik wrote:

I understand the comment now. This is a hard issue. It's challenging enough already to deal with the amount of spam, abuse, cheating, and poor behavior from how many members we have, but to then go in and mark their comments as keep, remove, keep, remove, keep, etc - we just can't do all of that. If someone creates a great blog post or forum, but then goes on to verbally abuse 10 of their opponents - we just can't handle the nuance of deciding that some of their content should stay. In an ideal world with unlimited resources, sure, I think that makes sense. But it's just an impossibility at this point.

My suggestion is: if someone is closed, and you think their content deserves to remain active on the site, please reach out to our support team to let us know and we can evaluate. I'm sorry that we don't have an easier solution for this at this time.

That was pretty much my suggestion. Self-closing after a mute creates a situation where that former-member's content is hidden. Generally a member whose content is worthwhile is also savvy enough to know this will happen if he closes their account rather than just leave without closing the account. Additionally, members who get muted and close their accounts, but while here provided such quality content or even comments witty or helpful enough that their content should be preserved are so few and far between that a simple request to unmute their account seems a reasonable solution to a very minor and rare issue.

The concept of being valuable to the community is itself absurd. Ghost_of_pushwood's posts should be preserved? Why? The days of witty comments being appreciated by adult members is long gone.

How old are are the people here? 6, 7, 8?

https://www.chess.com/forum/view/off-topic/how-old-are-yall?

As old as 9?

It's literally a daycare. Low effort posts dominate.

How can you tell? Just search for low effort posts via this handy link:

https://www.chess.com/forum/hot-topics

Where you quickly find that the majority of chess.com's forum posts are 5 words or less i.e.

https://www.chess.com/forum/view/off-topic/king-of-the-ladder?page=6373#last_comment

---

So I have to disagree with @erik.

This is not a "challenging" topic. The forums are for children... and not just children, but young children. The idea of preserving clever posts, particularly posts that are deemed clever by an old man such as @alczervik is laughable. There is no community here, not for anyone whose age happens to be as high as double digits.

--- Some good points !

Maybe @erik could have his programmers develop an algorithm that ranks user's posts by the grade level of their writing.

This would be a good way to maximize profits. Mute anyone who frequently posts above the 5th grade level.

This has the added benefit of making (most) posts comprehensible to @erik himself.