Dear provider of real world wisdom,
Tell me how to win the lottery. Not those cheap 2 million dollar ones but the big 500+ million dollar ones and not just one of them... all of them!
The end
Dear Lord of Lactose:
Before I answer your question (and there is an answer - I watched the relevant parts of Real Genius), I need to show you something. It's a fascinating, wondrous, captivating world called "mathematics". In "mathematics" people use logic and reason to create formulas and shit, and these are used to prove or disprove certain beliefs.
For example - you want to win a lottery. Excuse me, I stand corrected. Your unrealistic, over-optimistic cheese munching ass wants to "win all the lotteries". We can apply a simple mathematical formula to this to determine whether this is realistic, or whether you're just being a fucking moron.
Here's the relevant excerpt from Wikipedia, the fount of all human knowledge since the Dawn of Man:
Bayes’ Theorem, A Quick Introduction
We all know that the probability of a hypothesis being true often changes in
light of the evidence. Wouldn’t it be cool if math could help us show how it
works? Fortunately, math is cool enough to help out here thanks to something
called Bayes’ theorem. In this article I’ll introduce Bayes’ theorem and the
insights it gives about how evidence works. In my next blog entry I’ll show how
Bayes’ theorem can be applied in the service of theism.
One Form of Bayes’ Theorem
Bayes’ theorem is often used to mathematically show the probability of some hypothesis changes in light of new evidence. Bayes’
theorem is named after Reverend Thomas Bayes, an ordained Christian minister and mathematician, who presented the theorem in 1764 in his
Essay towards
solving a problem in the doctrine of chances. Before showing what the theorem is, I’ll recap some basic probability symbolism.
[TABLE="class: inline"]
[TR]
[TD="class: mid_li"]Pr(A) =
[/TD]
[TD]The probability of A being true; e.g. Pr(A) = 0.5 means “The probability of
A being true is 50%.”
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: mid_li"]Pr(A|B) =
[/TD]
[TD]
The probability of A being true given that B is true. For example:
Pr(I am wet|It is raining) = 0.8
This means “The
probability that I am wet given that it is raining is 80%.”[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: mid_li"]Pr(¬A) =
[/TD]
[TD]The probability of A being being false (¬A is read as “not-A”); e.g.
Pr(¬A) = 0.5 means “The probability of A being false is 50%.”
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: mid_li"]Pr(B ∪ C) =
[/TD]
[TD]The probability that B or C (or both) are true.
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: mid_li"]Pr(B ∩ C) =
[/TD]
[TD]The probability that B and C are both true.
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: mid_li"]Pr(A|B ∩ C) =
[/TD]
[TD]The probability of A given that both B and C are
true.
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Some alternate forms:
[TABLE="class: inline"]
[TR]
[TH]One Version
[/TH]
[TH]Alternate Forms
[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: mid_li"]Pr(A)
[/TD]
[TD]P(A)
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: mid_li"]Pr(¬A)
[/TD]
[TD]Pr(~A), Pr(−A), Pr(A[SUP]
C[/SUP])
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: mid_li"]Pr(B ∪ C)
[/TD]
[TD]Pr(A ∨ B)
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: mid_li"]Pr(B ∩ C)
[/TD]
[TD]Pr(B ∧ C), Pr(B&C)
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: mid_li"]Pr(A|B)
[/TD]
[TD]Pr(A/B)
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
The alternate forms can be combined, e.g. an alternate form of Pr(H|E) is P(H/E).
Bayes’ theorem comes in a number of varieties, but here’s one of the simpler ones where
H is the hypothesis and
E is the evidence:
In the situation where hypothesis
H explains evidence
E, Pr(E|H)
basically becomes a measure of the hypothesis’s
explanatory power. Pr(H|E) is called the
posterior
probability of H. Pr(H) is the
prior probability of H, and Pr(E)
is the prior probability of the evidence (very roughly, a measure of how
surprising it is that we’d find the evidence). Prior probabilities are
probabilities relative to background knowledge, e.g. Pr(E) is the likelihood
that we’d find evidence
E relative to our background knowledge.
Background knowledge is actually used throughout Bayes’ theorem however, so we
could view the theorem this way where
B is our background knowledge: [TABLE="class: inline"]
[TR]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Pr(H|E&B) =
[/TD]
[TD]
[TABLE="class: fraction"]
[TR]
[TD="class: top"]Pr(H|B) × Pr(E|H&B)
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: bottom"]Pr(E|B)
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
So what does tell us?
It tells us that people who are really, fantastically, unbelievably smart can't figure out how to win the lottery even once, never mind every time. Do you know how I figured this out? Do you think I understand Bayes Theorem? Fuck no, I can't even do pot odds. I know smart people can't figure out how to win the lottery even once because if they could THEY WOULD BE ON A GODDAMN BEACH SOMEWHERE BANGING THAT BIG BOOBED CHICK FROM THE GAME OF WAR ADS WITH A FRUITY DRINK IN A COCONUT IN THEIR HANDS AND NOT SOMEWHERE IN A ROOM ILLUMINATED WITH ONE DIM LIGHTBULB TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE WEIRDO FROM A PERFECT MIND WAS WRITING ON THE GODDAMN WINDOW BEFORE HE SHOVED HIS DESK OUT INTO THE QUAD AND STARTED IMAGINING SHIT.
Think about. If I could win the goddamn lottery, would I be dispensing free (albeit invaluable) information on a cheap knockoff of ChipTalk?
I don't expect you to understand any of this. You're from Minn-e-zota, the land that forgot sun and the consonant 'S'. Just try to keep up and don't mention the Vikings, OK, champ?
Wearily,
Edward Teller
- - - - - - - - - Updated - - - - - - - - -
Why are the Cleveland Browns more entertaining in the off season? Ray Farmer is going to have draft picks taken away, Josh Gordon is suspended for the whole year, Johnny Manziel is in Rehab and season ticket prices are increasing.
Also since when did it become acceptable to chew with ones mouth open?
Dear Forlorn One,
Firstly, let's get some housekeeping out of the way. Ask me one question at a time. Is this so goddamn hard? Jesus, Mary, and Ed...I've got the Communist from New Jersey asking me absolutely nothing and just making random statements comprised primarily of sentence fragments that eschewed punctuation, and then you trying to double up and get extra value from a double question single post.
I can understand the frustration you must feel. I can sense your overwhelming ire. You're a Cleveland fan. You probably go to bed at night thinking about Craig Ehlo crumpling to the ground after MJ hit the 18 footer. It's gotta be tough with your basketball team's major highlight focusing on the other team and being subject to a Gatorade commercial with legs. And your baseball team's most famous exports are Charlie Sheen and Albert Belle's shivering forearm. But you'll always have football. Good 'ole American football.
So let's get to question number one, and then out of the benevolence of my gracious heart, I'll also give you a succinct answer to question number two. Just don't pull this shit again, OK Knute Rockne?
Question #1:
Why are the Cleveland Browns more entertaining in the off season? Ray Farmer is going to have draft picks taken away, Josh Gordon is suspended for the whole year, Johnny Manziel is in Rehab and season ticket prices are increasing.
You're making the dangerous assumption that the Cleveland Browns are entertaining in any season. They're not, but let's entertain you for the moment and assume they are. Firstly, taking away Ray Farmer's draft picks is really a favor to Ray Farmer. I don't even know who Ray Farmer is. I'll assume he's not Kevin Costner's character in the "The Draft" and that he's, you know, a live human being who purports to be the Cleveland Browns General Manager. Do you really want to hear the commissioner say "With the most useless pick in the 2015 NFL draft, the Cleveland (choking back laughter) Browns select....."? Do you really want him to end that sentence? Do you want to hear the sound of your GM bending over and taking one right in the cornhole? That's basically what's going to happen. Just be happy that the Browns have less exposure to massive embarrassment on ESPN. Honestly, it's best if your franchise just moves to Los Angeles and calls themselves the "Mastadons".
Josh Gordon and Johnny Manziel are in the wrong business. Can you imagine if there was a Professional Beer Pong League (BPL)? These guys would be THE BEST OF ALL FUCKING TIME! There would be nobody better, ever. It's like MJ and LeBron playing on the same team. Like Gehrig and Ruth (wait, that actually happened). Like Montana and Brady (OK, that makes no sense because they're both quarterbacks - whatfuckingever). They would be UNSTOPPABLE.
Unfortunately, these fucktards play football. Josh Gordon can't keep the bong out of his mouth and Johnny Football is the biggest bust since Ryan Leaf (who was incidentally just incarcerated, again).
I don't have a lot of advice for you, except these 3 options:
1) Kill yourself.
2) Volunteer as DetroitDad's First Mate on his cruise to the east of Africa
3) Become a Cubs fan. Then kill yourself.
Regarding your second question:
Also since when did it become acceptable to chew with ones mouth open?,
I've found it that it largely depends on the situation. If I was 6'6", weighed 325 lbs, and had a body fat of 4%, I'd pretty much take a shit on your face and there isn't much that you can do about it. Be happy that it's just chewing and get over it. You can always do what I do and stare uncomfortably at the menu while wondering how many beers you're going to get down before your significant other says "Isn't 14 enough for dinner?"
Regretfully,
- Brandon Weeden's Brandon Weeden Face
- - - - - - - - - Updated - - - - - - - - -
Advice? Perhaps some of us need "Dirty Deeds.... Done Dirt Cheap" Let me know when you open that thread.
Thank for your writing King Zilla. I'm in a serious relationship at the moment, and am unfortunately not interested in your overt sexual advances, but let me know if you turn into that chick with the big boobs that's banging Justin Verlander.
Best wishes,
- A Guy That Wishes He Was Justin Verlander for 18 Minutes