>>71291627
This is hardly an autism test. Isn't it statistics? I'm terrible at math, are autists bad at math?

>>71291732
I don't think there is any math or probability involved either. We already knew at least one of the unselected door had a goat behind it. No information was added by the host action, so no change in probabilities.

Donnie Darko, maybe

>>71291627
Moon is an underrated gem along with Dredd and Whilpash

>>71291627
Always switch. This is called the monty hall problem.

>>71291732
The autism test is seeing how many people analyze the phrase "autism test".

>>71291974
Now this is a real autism test

>>71291974
>bait

>>71292228
I know how it works theoretically, but if you do it with real trials does the 50% versus 33% success rate hold up? I can't wrap my mind around that.

>>71291627
What if I want the goat?

>>71292376
Then you should stay in Pakistan

>>71292303
If you know how it work theoretically, how can you not wrap your head around it?

Yes it works.

>>71292376
Then once the host opens a goat door you should pick the opened door.

>>71291974
The question is framed improperly. The host knows that the door he opens will contain a goat, it is not picked at random.

>>71292228
desu it really doesn't matter if you switch or not.
At first, all 3 doors had a probability of 33.33...%. After the reveal, the remaining two doors still have equal probabilities at 50%.

>>71292303

You have 50 doors, choose one, then the host opens 48 of the other doors that have goats behind them, do you switch to the only other one left? Same principle.

>>71292303
The best way I had it described to me was imagine there were 100 doors instead of 3. Then once you pick one 98 of the doors are shown to have a goat and you're left with 2 doors. The reason the door you picked is probably still in play is because you picked it, not because it has the prize behind it. The same principal applies to the 3 door scenario.

>>71292767
That's good, nice explanation

>>71292583

I'll call this one bait too because there is no way people are this retarded.

>>71292303
It's not actually 50% on the second trial, it's 66% because you've basically rolled over the probability from the 3rd or 2nd door having the car behind it into the just the 2nd door if that makes sense.

>alter the question in the picture
>10 million replies guaranteed