How does the education system work in your cunt?
How smart are people from your country?
Is your country known for any advances in science, maths, arts, philsophy, etc?
Do you think your fellow countrymen are dumb?
>>57436264
>How does the education system work in your cunt?
I think it works very good except English class.
>How smart are people from your country?
I think 50-60% of people can answer the question of the pic in 10 sec.
>Is your country known for any advances in science, maths, arts, philsophy, etc?
I believe we are good at science.
>Do you think your fellow countrymen are dumb?
No.
>>57436264
100%
/thread
>>57436613
proof?
>>57438014
he's midas
>>57438014
It was answer to the picture. Sarcasm answer, of course.
>>57436264
Chance: 2/3
100% becuase italians are jews and we smell gold
>>57438287
>2/3
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=L-UqwMntWZI
>>57436264
50%
it either is or it isn't
>>57438465
Are you mentally handicapped or something?
You know you have your hand in either the gold only or silver and gold box.
If it's in the gold only box, you are guaranteed to take gold.
If its in the silver and gold, you either take gold.
Or you either take silver.
Three possibilities total, 2 of which you get gold.
Dumb as shit. We're too few and too spoiled to have a proper educational system, everything is about catering to the average here.
>>57438587
He is baiting you
>>57438587
But there is the box WITHOUT gold balls. If you took any gold ball, you can't count the box WITHOUT any gold balls.
>>57438700
And I'm baiting him back.
This is a clickbait thread.
25% it can only be the 2 boxes
Put them together since you don't know which one is which it would be 3 to 1 thus 25% unless you are playing at pavlova cat
>>57439549
>25%
50%
>>57438587
>from the same box
Jesus Christ lad that's easy as shit, you just need to pay more attention.
>>57438566
This is the correct answer.
Our system is so wildly varied that you can't make blanket generalizations that it's good/bad, it definitely needs work though. Basically the quality is schools depends on
1) What state you're in
2) How rich the area your school's zone is
#1 is the most important consideration, because generally the shittier schools in good States will be better than the good schools in bad States. For example for my first 2 years of high school I went to a below average school in a lower middle class exurb of Chicago, the last two I went to school in one of the riches public schools in Las Vegas. I was a full year above my grade in Nevada despite it being one of the best in the state, and my school in Illinois not being very good since Nevada schools are shit. That's basically how it is in the US, the more money you have the greater chance you have at being successful provided you don't live in a shitty state, and that's how you end up with the US having both some of the smartest people alive and some of the dumbest of any developed nation, with our most powerful state (California) having the best minds in the tech industry and one of the lowest iqs of any state.
1/3
When you're 12 you go to dumb kids school for 4 years, normal kids school for 5 years or smart kids school for 6 years.
The smarter you are the most subjects you get and the deeper the material.
And after two years you have to pick one of four packages of subjects + 2 subjects of your choosing.
Nature and healthcare, economy and society, nature and engineering, or culture and society.
>>57441187
There are actually five types of dumb kids schools and two types of smart kid schools.
>>57441187
What happens to people who go to dumb school?
>>57438566
AMIS
M
I
S
actual mathematician here.. protip: it's not 66.66666%
PM me for the right answer hehehe
>>57441329
You learn some basic skills. In preperation for trade school. So you can become a painter, a mechanic or a chef.
Normal kid school prepares you for a bachelor education for an actual job, like engineering, accountant, IT, nurse and architect.
Smart kid school prepares you for a theoretical master at an university. To study law, farmacy, healing sciences, math, and so on.
If you have a high school degree you will always be accepted to the matching next level of education. So universities will always accept smart kids for example. But you can also spend 2 years getting a better high school degree.
>>57441721
no one cares
>>57441814
>someone specifically asked
>in a thread about education system
You'd fit right in at dumb kids school. Working with your hands.
>>57441931
get a load of this hothead
>>57441721
Dumb kids work with their hands.
Normal people apply sciences.
And smart people discover bold new theories.
>>57442341
>FEDORATIPMAYNE.PNGJPEGGIF
>>57442341
2/3
>>57442372
Meanwhile in the UK and the USA smart kids get bullied for being more intelligent than the dumbest kid in class.
>>57442556
And ameriniggers go to the university to meet racial quotas.
Here you need the right papers.
mais ou menos 37,5782328655583%
>>57441187
Feels to early to be making decisions to me. Is it easy to jump between them?
>>57442911
You don't really make a decision going to high school, during elementary you get test which show what level you are.
In the first year it's pretty easy to hop levels.
But the picking your classes at 13-14 is a bit early, but you can get extra classes if you need them later on. Deciding what trade school/college/university direction you want to go is too early. I had to pick that when I was 16.
>>57442911
It's theoretically possible. But usually it's people who perform badly who drop to a lower level. It's rarely the other way around.
Parents often insist their kids should be put on a higher level. And if the teachers listen to that those kids will then be set up for failure. Because parents underestimate how hard it will be.
When kids get 6 superficial subjects at dumb kids school you might get 14 intensive ones at smart kids school. And you might get 5 languages at the same time plus math and chemistry and so on. Blowing their minds.
I also dropped from smart to normal, because I couldnt speak French and sucked at writing German. But after my bacheler degree I went on to university for a master anyway.
>>57440146
>>57439549
>>57438587
>>57438465
All wrong. 2/3 is the correct answer.
Imagine the balls are lettered left to right. A B C are gold, D E F are silver.
The first ball you took can only be A, B, or C.
If you took A, your next ball will be B. GOLD
If you took B, your next ball will be A. GOLD
If you took C, your next ball will be D. SILVER
Thus two out of three chances of getting a gold ball. America wins again!
>>57436264
hmm
i take a box, get gold ball, this means i have taken one of the two most left sided boxes, either the one with two gold balls or the one with one gold and one silver
now i don't know which one so i take from a total of 2 gold balls and 1 silver ball
the answer is 2/3, right?
>>57436264
>How does the education system work in your cunt?
4 years elementary
5 years primary
3 years secondary
secondary can be substituted with 3 years secondary/vocational (or tradeschool what ever the term is)
this is followed by either trade schools or universities for
3 years bachelors
2 years masters
... doctorate
>How smart are people from your country?
smarter than the rest that's for fucking sure
>Is your country known for any advances in science, maths, arts, philsophy, etc?
i don't think my country is known at all
>Do you think your fellow countrymen are dumb?
not really
>>57436264
>How does the education system work in your cunt?
Preschool -> Elementary school -> Middleschool -> Junior High -> Highschool -> College -> Graduate School
>How smart are people from your country?
Varying from the smartest in the world to barely smarter than produce
>Is your country known for any advances in science, maths, arts, philsophy, etc?
An incredible amount yes
>Do you think your fellow countrymen are dumb?
The average person knows basic subjects but doesn't understand economics/physics/etc and likes to pretend they do, usually using knowledge from 5 minute Youtube videos or clickbait articles. This is especially prevalent in young people.
>>57443203
>>57443247
Thanks for good answers. Hearing it was based on tests and not choice made me like it more aswell. In Norway we just put everyone in the same classes until 15, it's horrible for any pupil above average. After 15 we split up more, but only in Oslo is there enough people to really have entire classes of good students. Growing up in one of the least educated parts of Norway, I never had any especially gifted kids in my class until uni. It made me a lazy bum comparing myself to underachievers, but the reality check was also relieving of some sort.
>>57436264
>How does the education system work in your cunt?
Horribly. Public K-12 is a joke, and private institutions are prohibitively expensive for an overwhelming majority. I was lucky that the whole reason my family came to this country was a well-paying job offer, but for people not so fortunate, the Internet is your best shot at education worth a shit if you aren't rich, but that doesn't provide legal "in education" status, now does it? Pretty much your best bet at a quality education on the cheap is nonstandard: Do exceedingly well as a small kid. Difficult for dudes with the material so optimized for the feminine brain that 2/3 of boys are on psychoactives. But persevere, then load the fuck up on AP or IB credits the moment you hit high school, drop out early with college credit under your belt, and get a GED, then go to community college for a year or two, transfer to a local state university, and then go to grad school (very hopefully) abroad. Currently in the state university stage myself, hoping to get back to my hometown of Cambridge, England for grad school.
>How smart are people from your country?
It's so far across the board that it's hard to say anything other than "average". People seem dumb to me, but that's probably because I'm an autismal egotist.
>Is your country known for any advances in science, maths, arts, philsophy, etc?
I think my flag speaks for itself here.
>Do you think your fellow countrymen are dumb?
Yeah. But see above.
As for the pic, once you grab a box, and draw gold, you know that your box was one of two of the original three. One possibility, silver remains, the other, gold remains. So 1/2.
>>57446680
>usually using knowledge from 5 minute Youtube videos
if you watch a lot of those videos they are actually really informative
>>57448338
>So 1/2.
>>57450135
>t. 15yo High-school dropout
>>57436264
50%
>>57451391
no i actually did really good in high school, they gave me a diploma and everything
but really though that hank green guy knows a lotta stuff watch some of his vids you will learn a LOT
>>57448338
That entire long winded speech and you still get the answer wrong.
>>57448338
>drop out early with college credit under your belt, and get a GED,
Way to fuck up your resume dumbass. They check for years completed in HS.
50%
Once you pull the gold ball, you know the box either has one other gold ball or a silver ball.
>>57445575
But you know that the first ball you pull is a gold ball
>>57436264
It's 50%.
People who say 2/3 should work on their reading comprehension.
>>57436264
1/2 because the silver box is completely irrelevant, and you are choosing boxes not balls. It doesn't matter there is 2 gold balls because you aren't choosing a new box, you either have the double gold or you don't
>How does the education system work in your cunt
poorly, honestly if you want a good education you need to go to a good private school unless your public school district happens to be very good (as they still vary greatly in quality)
>How smart are people from your country
its hit or miss really. I'd say like 35% would get the top pic correct, then like 35% would be tricked, and then the rest would collect welfare
>Is your country known for any advances in science, maths, arts, philosophy, etc?
Yes we are a powerhouse in achievements because although we have a lot of stupid people we also have the smartest people.
>Do you think your fellow countrymen are dumb
Not dumb but more naïve
>>57436264
If you are born in a rich area where teachers are paid more and they actually care about your education, then you will be taught everything you need to know at a proficient level.
If you were born into a poor area, teachers won't give a shit about you and you will have to study on your own more to learn what you want to.
People from America are smart, but the glory about America for example is you can have someone who is a master mechanic,but doesn't know where Australia is on a map. That's fine, he most likely won't need to know that anyway to contribute to our society.
We're known for advances in all categories, but I'd say we're known for putting out a lot of patents on inventions that we've come up with.
Personally I don't think anyone is dumb, as everyone is an expert at something or an another. That's the glory of a capitalist system. I do believe people in America are lazy in that they don't want to improve one they hit minor success, but I've seen a change in this recently/
>>57445575
That's what I was thinking. 2/3 of the time when you pick a gold ball, you have picked the gold ball in the box with 2 gold balls. So, 2/3 of the time, your second pick be the other gold ball since you pick the same hall twice.
Isn't this basically the Monty Hall problem?
>>57452610
>since you pick the same hall twice.
I mean since you pick from the same **box twice
Use Bayes formula
The probability of a given b is equal to the probability of a and b divided by the probability of b.
Let a be picking from the box with two gold balls.
Let b be picking a gold ball from any box.
The probability of a is pretty obviously 1/3.
The probability of b is 1/2 (there are three gold balls out of 6 balls). You can also think of b as 1*(1/3) + (1/2)*(1/3) + 0*(1/3) = 1/2 if you want to break it out into the three separate boxes.
So the probability of picking from the gold box (a) given that you picked a gold ball at random initially (b) is (1/3) / (1/2) = 2/3.
If you don't believe me, you are literally arguing that mathematics isn't real.
>>57436264
The probability is 1/3.
Only the first of the boxes contains two golden balls, so your initial choice of box already decides whether you can even pick a second golden ball.
>>57436264
2/5
>>57453994
It fucking tells you that you got a golden ball kraut
in the scenario its impossible to get the silver box
Everytime you make a choice that result in only two different results, the probability of getting one of the two results is always 50%. People who don't know this get tricked into gambling by placing their bets always on the same colour because sooner or later it will turn up and they will win more. Which does not happen.
>>57454637
italia confirmed for retarded
>>57454779
I am sorry, do you think you have written an argument? Because I cannot find any in your post
>>57454637
That's why I always play the lottery. I can literally win millions of dollars half the time, and a ticket only costs $1.
>>57454851
>https://www.khanacademy.org/math/probability
should be more than enough for a simpleton as yourself
> so many retards ITT
Its 40% you fucking imbeciles.
>>57436264
sinkwenta porsyento because it's either
> [G G] --> [G -]
or
> [S G] --> [S -]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand%27s_box_paradox
>>57454915
You missed one of the points I made.
If the lottery only had two numbers, and you could choose only one of them, then yes. Everytime you play you would have 50% chance of winning. But you don't, you have to choose a series of numbers, in a pool of a hundred numbers, that have an incredibly high number of combinations they can appear in, in the scope of that series.
>>57454944
You still didn't write any argument. You are only showing how stupid you are with each iteration of posts devoid of arguments. So, no, not enough, you will have to do better.
>>57455025
i don't understand why is this a "paradox"? this is pleb tier
>>57455048
i just copy pasted the first link from googling "basic probability and statistics"
something you obviously have no clue about so i thought i'd help you out you know
>>57455069
so you googled literally "probability" and "statistics". Then you say you are smarter than me but you are not able to give any reasonable argument about why I am wrong and you are right. Heck, you don't even have any argument to prove, since you only insulted me without supporting any idea whatsoever. Could it be that you don't know what you are talking about and you are full of shit? I feel 100% confident that's how it is.
>>57455069
the instruction is unclear. I think the question should be
>if you pick a box and the pick a ball which is gold, what is the proba...
That image assumed that you already picked a box with a gold ball.
>>57455161
confirmation of being a retard double checked!
>>57455169
see
>>57445944
I will explain why it is 2/3 in layman's terms for those who are unfamiliar with basic probability.
I think the confusion coming from people who think that it is 1/2 comes from the fact that they think that the phrase "It's a gold ball" implies that when you do the experiment, the first ball you pull out will be gold. That is simply false, simply from the procedures as defined in the problem. The procedure states that you pick one box randomly, then pick one ball in that box randomly. It does not say that you are picking a gold ball.
That part of the question is there to indicate the single event of picking a gold ball first, and then asks for the situation given that you seen the event. A better way to phrase the last two sentences is "What is the probability that the next ball you take from the same box will also be gold IF the first ball you took was gold".
It is clear that doing the procedure as described in the OP, of picking a box at random, and then picking a ball at random, will not guarantee that the first ball you pick is gold. The problem is asking you to ignore those times where you picked a silver ball first.
So let's go over a typical example of doing the procedure in the OP 600 times. Around 200 times, you will pick box A, and all of those times, you will pick a gold ball. Around 200 times, you will pick box B, and around 100 times, you will get a silver ball from box B, and around 100 times you will get a gold ball from box B. Around 200 times, you will get a silver ball from box C.
We will now focus ONLY on the events in which a gold ball was picked. Around 200 times, box A was picked, meaning the other ball will be gold. There are around 300 total times where a gold ball was picked. So therefore, the answer is 2/3.
>>57455243
>I think the confusion coming from people who think that it is 1/2 comes from the fact that they think that the phrase "It's a gold ball" implies that when you do the experiment, the first ball you pull out will be gold. That is simply false, simply from the procedures as defined in the problem. The procedure states that you pick one box randomly, then pick one ball in that box randomly. It does not say that you are picking a gold ball.
>what is the probability that the next ball you take from the same box will also be gold
>what is the probability that the next ball you take from the same box will also be gold
>what is the probability that the next ball you take from the same box will also be gold
>what is the probability that the next ball you take from the same box will also be gold
>what is the probability that the next ball you take from the same box will also be gold
>>57455048
There are 3 gold balls. 2 of them are in Box A. 1 of them is in Box B.
>>57455319
it does not matter how many balls there are because they can only be either gold or silver balls, only two types. The fact that one of the boxes has both gold and silver is only used so you cannot determine which ball will come next by knowing the context of the balls location. It serves to keep the choices non-deterministic. Everytime you make a choice, it is a non-conscious choice that rests upon a 50% chance everytime. The probabilities of getting silver or gold don't raise after you pick the first one. Think about it. The possibility that you will get either one or the other as second ball remain the same they were in the beginning. The number of boxes can be distracting, but does not change the probabilities at all.
>>57455237
still no argument. I guess that is why your land has always been an irrelevant shithole assraped by everyone. And this >>57445944 only makes me laugh. Are you 12?
>>57455485
>The probabilities of getting silver or gold don't raise after you pick the first one.
Conditional probability does not care about order. Information is information, and additional information can change probability.
>>57455485
holy shit anon you are beyond repair
just take the course i linked you to and then go into the shame corner when you figure out why you're completely wrong and assmad about being a literal idiot
>>57436264
post the webm of those black girls dancing on the table at school that pretty much sums it up
>>57455664
Is the answer 2/5 ?
>>57456313
how can the answer be 2/5 if your selection is 3?
>>57452610
>>57455025
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand%27s_box_paradox
>Two problems that are very similar are the Monty Hall problem
ha I knew it
>>57456473
There's six balls, half gold half silver.
You grab and gold one (which is then discarded)
That leaves only 2 gold ones and 3 silver ones, 5 in total, and so the chances of grabbing another one is 2/5 since there's now only 2 gold balls, and 3 silver ones (remember the picking is being done randomly)
>>57456616
did you even read the op pic?
>>57456649
Tell me what I'm missing.
>>57456685
You've already grabbed a gold ball.
The box with the two silver balls are out of the picture, since you're taking from the same box.
>>57456616
It says the second ball you choose has to be from the same box that you chose the first ball; you don't get to switch boxes.
>>57455664
you are correct, but you're being an arrogant cunt
>>57456685
you took one box at random
from box you took random ball
it was gold
so that means you took one of the two boxes that contained at least one gold ball
now you take another ball
but!
since you already know you have taken one from a box that contains at atleast one golden ball you're left with only two boxes, one of which contains two gold one of whic contains none
total is 3
2 gold
1 silver
....
>>57456746
and the italian was being totally reasonable? trying to shit on my country just because he is a complete fucktard?
>>57436264
1/2
>>57456732
You can't see into the boxes so you don't know which is the box with the two silver balls, since the gold ball you grabbed could be either from the box with one of each or the box with both gold.
>>57456781
How am I left with only 2 boxes? Like I said before, the box I grabbed could be either the one with one of each or the one with both gold ones.
>>57457173
Just fucking read >>57455243 faggot. It literally spells everything out for you.
>>57456781
The Italian wasn't reasonable in the slightest in his answer to OP's pic, but he wasn't acting like a cunt until you agitated him. He just wanted you to explain why he was wrong and what your answer was, which you never did. You didn't even point him to the numerous Americans in this thread that have explained the answer. You only told him to go blindly watch some Khan Academy.
You have to explain why the context to the situation is pertinent to the probability of what will happen.
When debating, you can't just tell your opponent to read your sources without stating any sort of argument. You're not gonna convince him of anything, especially if you do so in a haughty manner.
>>57457219
Yeah, no faggot, he's literally misinterpreting the problem.
The question are the probability of you grabbing a gold ball after having grabbed one in the first try, period, no more bullshit.
>>57457296
this was not a debate though and i only linked the reaourse so the man can go and educate himself
>>57457383
And it's 2/3. You can run the trials yourself.
>>57457383
No, you can't switch boxes once you've picked a ball from one
>>57457487
Nobody said anything about switching boxes.
>>57457487
Ahh fuck me, I misread the fucking question.
I thought you were supposed to pick randomly again.
>>57457487
In that case it is 50/50.
>>57436264
>you pick a box
>you take a ball from the box
>it's a gold ball
>so you either have the gold-gold box or the gold-silver box
>"What's the probability that the next ball you take from the same box will be also gold"
>50% gold, 50% silver
>>57457743
Nope. See
>>57455243
>>57457695
It isn't 50/50.
Whenever you pick a gold ball, 2/3 of the time you would have picked a gold ball from the box with 2 gold balls.
Since you have to pick from the same box once more, 2/3 of the time your second ball will be gold, and 1/3 of the time it will be silver.
Thus the answer is 2/3.
>>57457754
That explanation is still bullshit btw.
>>57457813
No it's not. Explain why.
>>57436264
The chances seem 50/50 but could also be 50%.
Gold ratio: 0.5
Silver ratio: 0.5
>>57457806
After you picked a gold ball the box with only silver is excluded.
>>57457695
Picking a gold ball essentialy eliminates the box with silver balls from the equation and pulling one gold ball out leaves only three possibilities gold, gold and silver
>>57457912
What the fuck are "leftovers"? What you are doing makes no sense.
ITT: Arts students struggle with conditional probability
>>57457938
>take from the "same" box
>the box that has only one ball left
>>57457965
the coins from the box you chose that you did not take out
the query variable
2/3
>>57457806
It is 50/50, the first ball being gold is a given so it doesn't factor into the equation
Thus you're guaranteed to not have picked box number 3 so the chance of your second ball being gold is 50/50 because there's 2 boxes with a gold ball in them but only one of them has a second one
>>57457997
Post a pastebin of your code.
Probability is 2/3
>>57457848
> "What is the probability that the next ball you take from the same box will also be gold IF the first ball you took was gold".
That's how he interprets the question, which is not a corroborated interpretation in any way, there's no evidence for it, read the image again, clearly they are asking for the probability of the second ball from the same box being gold, and that's it, he's overcomplicating it.
>>57458042
>>57457912
https://bpaste.net/show/87ea498f412f
>>57458028
You're also guaranteed not to have picked the silver ball in the second box. So there are 3 balls you could have picked, two in A and one in B.
>>57436264
Badly
I think average IQ is around 85 or so
Aside from the vaccine against malaria nothing
Yes, my fellow colombians are dumb as bricks, barely rub sticks together
>>57458057
Now try changing tries to 1000.
>>57458051
So you're saying that whether the first ball being picked is gold or silver doesn't change the probability?
>>57458092
but that would take like 100 times longer to run
>>57458067
You are only allowed to pick the second ball from the same box you picked the first one though.
See >>57457487
>>57436264
Two out of three? If I'm holding a golden ball, we've already eliminated the silver-only box. I'd elaborate but I'm sure someone's given a better explanation ITT already.
Are the balls touching?
>How does the education system work in your cunt?
It's built on a basis of equality. This means that it produces high average outcomes but makes no special effort to promote excellence. Teachers are generally really good, though, and when there's an advanced student in class, they can usually accommodate.
No tuition fees in higher education means that universities can pick students based on their talent rather than family wealth. It's a small country, though, so the available pool of talent is proportionate.
>How smart are people from your country?
Probably no dumber than in any 1st world country. Genes play a part, but so does maternity care and infant health, and those are taken care of.
>Is your country known for any advances in science, maths, arts, philsophy, etc?
I don't suppose it is. There are some famous Finnish architects and designers, but it's not a cultural superpower by any measure.
>Do you think your fellow countrymen are dumb?
Sometimes. There's no real tradition of debate. If there's a situation where a Finn has to defend a point or negotiate, he'll usually just rephrase his initial position or give up. Public debates are infuriating to watch. This isn't really lack of intelligence but rhetorical poverty, though.
>>57458131
Are you using a toaster or something?
>>57458115
That's neither here nor there because the picture outright states that the first ball is gold
>>57458067
your box has only one ball left.
It cannot be the silver silver box.
It can be the gold silver box > you'll pick silver (you already picked the gold one)
or it is the gold gold box so now you pick the other gold ball.
Because you have to pick two times from the same box.
>>57458115
No, I'm saying that the first ball is gold, as stated in the fucking image.
>>57458140
>>57458163
There are three balls you can pick, ball 1 in box A, ball 2 in box A, and ball 3 in box B. If you pick ball 1 or ball 2, the other ball will obviously be gold. If you pick ball 3, the other ball will be silver.
>>57457936
>>57458028
I'm not saying it is 2/3 because there are 3 boxes, and I'm also well aware the silver-only box gets excluded.
>Whenever you pick a gold ball, 2/3 of the time you would have picked a gold ball from the box with 2 gold balls.
>Whenever you pick a gold ball
What I mean by this, is that since there are 3 gold balls, whenever you pick a gold ball, 2/3 of the time it comes from the box with two gold balls. If you picked a gold ball 300 times, around 200 times the ball will be from the box with 2 gold balls.
Because of both this fact and the fact that you have to take your second ball from the SAME box, 2/3 of the time you will pick two gold balls.
>>57458175
Read the question again.
>>57458151
>>57458171
Please tell me how you can follow the procedures as described EXACTLY in the OP, and be certain that the ball your draw is gold. Please tell me how you can pick box A, B, or C randomly, and then pick one of the two balls in the box, and GUARANTEE 100% that the ball is gold.
it's 50/50
if you pick up a gold ball it's either the gold/silver or gold/gold, so there's a 50% chance that it's either of those
>>57458207
the lottery is 50/50
if you play the lottery you either win or lose, so there's a 50% chance that it's either of those
>>57458143
What do you think about sunhill type schools?
Also is bullying a big problem in Finnish schools.
>>57458192
That's not the question.
>>57436264
50%, you get the same result with Monty Hall problem
>>57458242
Then answer this question >>57458204
>>57458204
Because it says so in the fucking picture you moron
Learn to read
>>57458272
So magical fairies?
>>57458242
Take it from a native English speaker, the question is asking only in the context that you have already selected 1 gold ball.
>>57458175
>>57458204
>>57458226
OH MY GOD, YOU ARE SO FUCKING BUTTBLASTED AND STUPID, READ THE FUCKING QUESTION AGAIN.
>>57458314
Maybe you should read the question again. How is the question consistent under your interpretation?
>>57458192
I understand what you're saying and you're not incorrect but it's not what the question is asking. Yes, 2/3s of the time you draw you'll get the box with both gold balls, but that's beyond the scope of the question. The question is simply asking the probability of taking a second gold ball if you already have one
Since there's no gold in box 3, there's only 2 possible boxes you could have picked; one has the second gold and the other doesn't. 50/50.
>>57458204
I'm not able to follow the described and get exactly a gold ball always.
Also there is a 50/50 chance since there are 3 gold and 3 silver balls.
But in this case it already happened so you hold a gold ball from a box in your hand and now you're going to pick the other ball.
What will this other ball be?
Do you know it?
I don't.
>>57458344
>Yes, 2/3s of the time you draw you'll get the box with both gold balls
You agree with this statement, yes?
>>57458357
Of course we don't know what the other ball can be. We can only calculate probabilities.
>>57458286
Sure, it doesn't matter because it's irrelevant to the purpose of the question
Have you never heard of a hypothetical question in your life or are you just dense?
>>57458234
>What do you think about sunhill type schools?
I'm not familiar with those
>Also is bullying a big problem in Finnish schools.
Yes, Jante Law and all. It's something that's taken seriously, however.
>>57458381
What is the hypothetical question?
>>57436264
>How does the education system work in your cunt?
Through segregation of children into "dumb", "not that dumb" and "not dumb" at small age
>How smart are people from your country?
I think a lot of them are very smart even they tend to be easy manipulated
>Is your country known for any advances in science, maths, arts, philsophy, etc?
Oh yes.
>Do you think your fellow countrymen are dumb?
No, not at all.
>>57458344
>Yes, 2/3s of the time you draw you'll get the box with both gold balls
What you're doing wrong is excluding this fact, when it is very relevant to the outcome color of the SECOND ball in your choice.
As you stated you know, when you pick gold, 2/3 of time it comes from the gold-only box.
What you're failing to realize is that, since you cannot switch boxes, 2/3 of your second pick (since 2/3 of first is from the gold only-box), will be the second ball in the gold-only box. The 2/3 DOES carry over.
There's a wikipedia page about this problem that explains in greater detail why it is 2/3:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand%27s_box_paradox
>>57458366
Yes, but like I said it's not what the question is asking.
Here's the question your post answers:
"What's the probability that you pull two gold balls in a row if your first ball is gold?"
Here's the question in the picture:
"What's the probability that you pull a second gold ball if your first ball is gold?"
It might seem like semantics but there is actually a difference between the two questions and their answers.
>>57458464
If the first ball is gold, then how does getting two gold balls in a row not equate to the second ball also being gold?
>>57458383
Individualism is the kill of the germanic.
Time to die, byebye!
Event A: drawing a second gold ball on the second try
Event B: drawing a gold ball on the first try
Conditional probability formula:
P(A|B) = P(A & B) / (P (B))
P(B) = 0.5 (3 gold balls out of 6)
P( A & B) = 1/3 (the chance of both balls being gold)
P(A|B) = (1/3)/(0.5) = 2/3
>>57458489
Question one addresses both balls as factoring into the probability
Question two addresses only the second
>>57458604
Both of them addresses both balls. That's what the "if your first ball is gold" is for.
>>57458615
>"if your first ball is gold
there is no "if"
It's a gold ball.
Since you always pull a gold ball the first time the answer is 50/50. These questions are just intentionally poorly worded and the intended answer is 2/3
3/4?
>>57458653
Answer this then >>57458204
Anyway niggas just switch the question around and you'll see why it's 2/3.
The question is basically what are the chances that you picked the double gold box if your first ball is gold?
The answer is 2/3 because if you picked a gold ball there's a 2/3 chance that it came from the double gold box.
>>57458671
Hypothetical question.
Like I drive with my car to McDonalds.
Can I follow this procedure?
No I can't because I don't have a car.
But can I imagine to do so?
Yes, I can imagine it.
If you actually do the procedure in rl you misunderstood the question. You failed the test. You didn't got the abstract logic made by men.
You need to train your brain and focus the thought on the problem and it's solution insteed of making mor problems out of one.
Strenghten your mind, young padawan.
>>57458464
>>57458604
Please read this >>57458454
>>57458779
Ok. Imagine that the first ball is gold.
How are "What's the probability that you pull two gold balls in a row?" and "What's the probability that you pull a second gold ball " different knowing that the first ball is gold.
The key is that both gold coins in the first box are indiscernible.
>>57458817
For me both questions ask the same.
Could be the poor english.
>>57458226
It's 2/3, anyone claiming otherwise is a ducking retard.
>>57458868
>ducking
smartphonetipper
>>57458847
You can only pic from one box.
The first pic is already done.
So you only have one ball to pic.
>>57458383
Oops, I messed up, it was Summerhill schools, not sunhill schools, anyways they're basically hippy schools that somehow work.
Pretty interesting desu.
How is bullying dealt with over there?
>>57458913
Just do the experiment, and throw out the cases where the first ball you picked is silver. See what happens.
>>57458539
No, the op says youve picked a golden ball on the first try, the last box is no longer relevant.
>>57458913
The arrows in>>57458847 represent the different first picks that can be made.
Then the ball left in the box is 1/3 silver, 2/3 gold.
If you follow the rules of the question the chance of drawing a silver ball first is 0. Hence the answer is 50%.
>>57458978
Read this >>57458454
I'm dumb as a country nigger and I'm equally bad at math, but even I, in my crippling cretinism, know the answer is fifty percent.
here's the answer:
>>57455025
>>57455025
>>57455025
>>57455025
now stop arguing
>>57458995
>>57458991
>>57458657
No, it's 2/3. If you don't believe the numerous anons in this thread explaining why, maybe you'll believe wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand%27s_box_paradox
>>57436264
1/3
>>57459041
Nope. The problem on that page is worded differently than in the op. Reread my post.
Dang. I feel stupid now. Just the answer is 66% percent.
>>57459093
We don't fucking know which is your post faggot. Explain how the problem in the OP is different.
>>57458994
> As you stated you know, when you pick gold, 2/3 of time it comes from the gold-only box.
No, that's 50% of the time because you will only pick from the boxes which actually have one gold ball, so the one box with both silver balls is excluded.
Why do I still bother? You will believe whatever deluded bullshit you want to believe anyways.
>>57442911
Yes, I went from normal people to smart people school and actually outperformed most people. The bad thing about this system is that because you get accepted almost automatically people usually just study for a passing grade and they don't get used to cramming, which they will need at uni.
>>57458990
If you calculate it yes.
If you do it, then no.
That's why it is a paradoxon.
>>57459041
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand%27s_box_paradox
This kills the brain
>>57436264
2/9
>>57459135
You can pick from any fucking box. The OP states "you pick a box at random". Only AFTER you pick the box and ball do you know the color. You don't go:
I am going to get a gold ball.
That means I must choose box A 1/2 the time, and box B 1/2 the time.
If I pick box B, then I have to look into the box and make sure I don't get a silver ball.
>>57459093
I'm gonna guess your reply was this one:>>57458657
>Since you always pull a gold ball the first time the answer is 50/50
It doesn't state you always pull a gold ball the first time, it says outcome after only 1 random box selection and only 1 random ball selection from said box. Only 1 time, not always.
It is the same situation as the wiki article
>>57459114
>>57458991
Im at work so i can't sit here and argue but notice the wiki page specifically says "if it happens to be gold" while the op directly states your first ball is always gold. It's intentionally poorly worded to bait people into calling each other retards.
>>57459093
Seconding this, the problem in the wikipedia is different, it doesn't specify that it has to be the same box like the op does.
ITT: People who suffer from ADHD and can't read the whole text.
It's 50 %.
>>57436264
The answer is 2/3
This is known as Bertrand's box paradox. The Bayes proof is in my pic
>>57459200
There is no way for the first ball to always be gold. Stating events and meaning for them to be conditionals is standard in the language of probability. The problems are equivalent.
>>57458929
Oh, Summerhill. Well, they're all moving to that direction. More electives, more participation and responsibility. The experience is that they work if the foundations are solid. This means that you need to have good teachers and the family needs to take an active role as well. Kids whose parents don't give a fuck seem to be left behind easily.
The new approach to bullying is that bullies are moved to different schools. It used to be that the victims were the ones who got relocated and that only added insult to injury. It's still a pretty extreme measure and teachers will do what they can to nip problems in the bud. The early approach is restorative justice instead of detention or punishments like that.
>>57459218
>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.
>Mexican """intellectuals""" in charge of reading comprehension
>>57459220
>>57459225
Do you understand the formula?
It states a different problem than in op pic.
There you try to find out what possibility it is that you picked the gold coin from the box with two gold coins.
>>57459292
If you picked the gold coin from the box with two gold coins, then the other coin in the box must be gold. They are equivalent problems.
>>57459292
You don't know how to read; there they are calculating the odds that the next selection is gold. It even fucking states so on the Wikipedia page:
"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."
Anyways we already had this discussion with some retards on /sci/ who thought it was 1/2 so I'm out. Apparently you morons can't even read the explanation of why it's not 1/2.
>>57459187
Wrong. You'll have picked and kept box A 2/3 of the time and B 1/3 of the time.
What you're forgetting is that when you pick up box B and the silver ball first, this experiment is discarded.
>>57459292
I understand the formula. Some of the wording in OP's picture and caption threw me off. Like repeating "random". If the first ball you pick is gold you set numerator equal to 1. Then denominator you add all the possibilities (outcomes) that it could be gold. Which would be (1+0+0.5). Trick part should be the part where it's 50% at the end. I think that is because it is compensating for the chance you pick GG box or GS box right? Since if first ball you pick is gold it has to be either one of those....
>>57459248
That's good, you've no idea what I'd do to change our "education" system to that of the Summerhill schools'.
Also what does "restorative justice" mean?
Some examples pls.
>>57440902
>Our system is so wildly varied that you can't make blanket generalizations that it's good/bad
You can
It's bad
If only the rich can afford to get a good education, it's bad and no different from any middle eastern shithole
Glad I helped you solve this mystery
>>57459220
>>57459218
>>57459093
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand%27s_box_paradox says
> 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.
OP pic's text:
>You pick a box at random. You put your hand in and take a ball from that box at random. It's a gold ball. What is the probability that the next ball you take from the same box will also be gold?
It's literally the same fucking question, stop making a semantics argument where there is none
>>57459388
The box with only silver balls is completely irrelevant to the problem. How on earth is it part of the formula?
>>57459388
I'll admit it's unclear if you read just that text but if they actually scrolled down and read the fucking math it's immediately clear we're talking about the same problem
>>57459218
>>57459093
>Suppose there are three cards:
>A black card that is black on both sides,
>A white card that is white on both sides, and
>A mixed card that is black on one side and white on the other.
>All the cards are placed into a hat and one is pulled at random and placed on a table. The side facing up is black. What are the odds that the other side is also black?
Replace "cards" with "boxes", "sides" with "balls", "black" with "gold", and "white" with "silver".
If you people seriously do not get it at this point, I suggest when you take your 8th grade math course, to just listen to what your teacher tells you and not try to argue.
>>57459200
>the op directly states your first ball is always gold
where
it says it is gold not that it will always be gold
the statements
>you picked a box and a first ball it is gold, what's the chance of picking a second gold ball
>if you pick a box and take a coin, and that coin happens to be gold, what's the chance that the other coin is also gold?
>you pick a box and take out a ball, it's gold what's the chance that you picked a double gold ball box?
are all equivalent
the last one is probably most inutitive to answer
>>57459403
Are there no probability courses taught in Germany? I thought you guys were supposed to all be autistic geniuses
>>57459230
Sure there is. There's a reason the question on wikipedia is very specifically worded. It's making sure there aren't multiple interpretations of it.
Anyway I'm a retard and you're a genius blahblahblah lets leave this thread now
>>57459450
Holy fuck you're retarded, please go read a fucking probability textbook or something
>>57459434
I'm betting it's the language barrier
>>57459405
The only thing I see unclear about it is how the wiki article doesn't directly state you chose the second coin/ball from the same box as the first one
>>57436264
It's 2/3
There are three golden balls, two of whitch lead into "another golden ball in the box"-result. So if you pick one golden up, 2:1 there is another one there
>>57448338
>Difficult for dudes with the material so optimized for the feminine brain
Top fucking kek what a retard
I was just pretending to be retarded.
>>57459483
That's what I mean, it doesn't state that directly in the problem statement at the top but if you scroll down to where they show the math it's clear you're picking from the same box
>>57459329
>>57459324
There are two different views on the problem.
The first one views it from the perspective of what box I choose.
There for for sure the box with two gold balls is two times more likely than the box with one gold ball.
The other view is to ignore what happened before and you now have a gold ball and either from the silver box or the double gold box.
It depends on how to understand the question.
here >>57459348
>What you're forgetting is that when you pick up box B and the silver ball first, this experiment is discarded.
The second view says that since event A already happened there is nothing to change there.
>>57459510
I think your confusion stems from never having taken any sort of probability course so you incorrectly view the problems
>>57459510
Look at this variation of the problem then. >>57459409
Explain how this variation is different.
>>57436264
>How does the education system work?
same classes until 15-16. Then you either take science or humanities, and sped 2 years preparing for a huge test. Seems good, but all of the public schools are memes and private schools are basically american public school level. Plus the teacher can basically fail you if he wants to.
>How smart are people from your country?
As smart as any.
>s your country known for any advances in science, maths, arts, philsophy, etc?
No not really. Maybe a little medicine though.
>Do you think your fellow countrymen are dumb?
No.
>>57459510
>The other view is to ignore what happened before and you now have a gold ball and either from the silver box or the double gold box.
That's why it's an elementary problem used to teach basic probability. In probability, you do NOT do this
>>57459510
I thought Germans were smart.
>>57459384
As a person who went to an American highschool I think I can say that its pretty mediocre overall, there's really good public schools, there's really bad public schools and everything in between due to the decentralized nature of the US.
>>57436264
>Do you think your fellow countrymen are dumb?
I think when you have 320 million people from all sorts of different cultural backgrounds you end up with a lot of really smart guys and a lot of retards. It would be stupid to make some blanket statement that all Americans are stupid
>>57459626
Did you get deported?
>>57459568
But what argument do you bring up to justify your way.
Because. Here >>57459409
Also in the card experiment the back side can be either white or black.
Tell me what problems come up from this view.
>>57459585
I don't think that smartness is about being right or wrong it's more about to understand systematics.
>>57436264
>Education system
Shitty to wonderful depending on where you are
>intelligence
Average iq I guess
>Is it known for advances?
It's the USA, more than I can list (but wiki can)
>Are your fellow countrymen dumb
Maybe
>>57459672
>Also in the card experiment the back side can be either white or black.
And in the box experiment, the other ball in in the box can either be gold or silver. What is your point?
>>57459434
>>57459585
I see german companies have made a good job brainwashing people
>>57459648
Nah, I left due to high costs of living, I was literally spinning my wheels into the mud.
It was an extremely enlightening process thought, being in the US I mean, it was an incredibly important part of making me who I am today, I believe everyone should live abroad during at least 5 years of their teens.
>>57459672
I can see where you're getting your frame of reference argument from but your argument is completely invalid in the context of any academic probability course.
Here's a C program that simulates it.
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <math.h>
int main(void)
{
int N=1000000,n,randbox,randball,otherball,m=0,M=0;
int boxes[3][2]={{1,1},{1,0},{0,0}}; /* 1=gold, 0=silver */
for(n=0;n<N;n++)
{
randbox=rand()%3; /* pick a random box */
randball=rand()%2; /* pick a random ball */
if (boxes[randbox][randball]==0) continue;
M++; /* count times we got a gold ball */
otherball=1-randball;
if (boxes[randbox][otherball]==1) m++;
}
printf("m:%d M:%d prob:%f\n",m,M,m/(double)M);
return(0);
}
This simulates it 1,000,000 times. Running it you get around .66666, which is 2/3. This isn't necessary since we can view it from the correct probabilistic frame of reference but still.
>>57436264
There are two trillion one boxes. Each box contains 2 balls. One trillion boxes contain 2 gold balls (box #.1, #.2... #.1 T), other one trillion boxes contain 2 silver balls (box #1T1, # 1T2.... #2T), and the final one box contains one gold ball and one silver ball.
You pick a box randomly an take a ball from the box. It's a gold ball. What is the probability that the next ball you take from the same box will also be gold?
Since I picked one gold ball, I know one trillion boxes with silver balls only (from box # 1T1 to #2T) can excluded.
still someone believes it's 50% ???
>>57459768
In case you don't believe me, try running it yourself at http://cpp.sh/2g4q
>>57459702
Point is that this are two possibilites and therefore 50/50 if you ignore that the box with gold gold (the card with both sides white) is twice as likely to have been chosen before.
I agree with you that 2/3 is the correct answer. And I understand why.
>>57459734
>hurr durr someone who doesn't know about propabilities because he didn't learn them in school must be dumb even he understood the concept in 10 minutes through a wiki article.
>>57459768
This is not an argument on this topic.
You just repeat the formula that was asked in question.
You have to consider both boxes simultaneously since you don't know which box you have picked and therefore there are 3 remaining balls that you can choose from, 2 of which are gold and one of which is silver. The answer is 2/3
>>57459905
So are you saying the answer to OP is 2/3 now?
>>57459905
So first you don't understand probability and now you can't even read a simple program properly
I give up, you're either retarded or a troll
>>57459925
Not only that, but he can't even read a fucking wikipedia article properly.
>>57460004
Why are you so upset?
>>57460109
I'm not upset, just sad for you m8.
>>57460136
People who didn't have propability courses in school making you sad?
I'm sorry lad, but that's nothing I can change.
>>57459863
1-1/1000000000001
:D
it was the gold and the jews and the zion and the zog that threw me off. I swear I was just pretending to be retarded.
Gold made me shoot my best friend in his head.
here's visualization
>>57445575
Think about it this way:
Imagine the boxes are lettered left to right. A is the double gold box, B is the mixed box, and C is the double silver box.
The first draw was from either A or B.
If A, the next ball will be gold.
If B, the next ball will be silver.
Thus 1/2 chance of the second ball being gold.
