Pointless argument about chance and randomness

"

Deccode wrote:

"How can there be a random system where all outcomes does not have the exact same chances"
Exactly!

You just saw the picture of such a system?

"

Deccode wrote:

"when a system is random when and only when all outcomes have the exact same chances?" Bingo!
I ask you are your writing skills or logically skills this time not working?

No, it's your reading comprehension and logical reasoning that fail.

Let me try again.
Your statement "The system is random when and only when all outcomes have exact same chances" can't be true if there is a system that is random and all outcomes does not have exact same chances. And we both just agreed that there was such a system.

"

Sickness wrote:

Your statement "The system is random when and only when all outcomes have exact same chances" can't be true

Now I assume here starts the part where you try to prove me wrong: "Because"

"

Sickness wrote:

if there is a system that is random and all outcomes does not have exact same chances.

This was actually the hardest part to decode your griberish. In fact you didn't prove anything but claimed something which was like contradicted from the links.

"

Sickness wrote:

And we both just agreed that there was such a system.

Where you can't predict the outcome but they must have equal chances the deeper/more you go/do? Bravo.

-

Are you high?
Or do you simply have such a complete lack of understanding of the issue that you really can't comperehend a single logical argument?

Your statement "The system is random when and only when all outcomes have exact same chances" can't be true if there is a system that is random and all outcomes does not have exact same chances.

So to prove you wrong I just need to show you such a system, I did (first pic in that link by mibuwolf). It's a system where all outcomes does not have the same chances and you agreed that it was random.
So your original statement was contradicted by reality. You were wrong. What is so hard to understand?

"

Sickness wrote:

Your statement "The system is random when and only when all outcomes have exact same chances" can't be true if there is a system that is random and all outcomes does not have exact same chances.

I honestly fail to see your proof about this oh wait...

"

Sickness wrote:

So to prove you wrong I just need to show you such a system, I did (first pic in that link by mibuwolf). It's a system where all outcomes does not have the same chances and you agreed that it was random.

No it's a system with different outcomes. No where does it say that the chance has to be non equal.
As I said your griberish fooled me once. Since you are not into writing let's try it with pictures. Second picture even proves your believes of the first picture. You didn't even had to scroll down this time it lol.

"

Deccode wrote:

No it's a system with different outcomes. No where does it say that the chance has to be non equal.
As I said your griberish fooled me once. Since you are not into reading let's try it with pictures. Second picture even proves your believes of the first picture. You didn't even had to scroll down this time it lol.

You really don't get it do you?
Here is the first picture:


It's a system that have 3 different outcomes, and they have different probabilities, namely 0.2, 0.5, 0.3 .

Here is the second:

It's a system that have 6 different outcomes, and they have the same probability.


Are you still with me?

According your original statement the first picture does not show a random system, but the second picture does. But since you even agreed that the first picture does show a random system you must surely realise that you were wrong at first?

"

Sickness wrote:

"

Deccode wrote:

No it's a system with different outcomes. No where does it say that the chance has to be non equal.
As I said your griberish fooled me once. Since you are not into reading let's try it with pictures. Second picture even proves your believes of the first picture. You didn't even had to scroll down this time it lol.

You really don't get it do you?
Here is the first picture:


It's a system that have 3 different outcomes, and they have different probabilities, namely 0.2, 0.5, 0.3 .

Here is the second:

It's a system that have 6 different outcomes, and they have the same probability.


Are you still with me?

According your original statement the first picture does not show a random system, but the second picture does. But since you even agreed that the first picture does show a random system you must surely realise that you were wrong at first?

I reread your griberish again and even now when I know what you tried to say it still doesnt make sense. If I said that the first picture doesn't show randomness then I was wrong yes. But yet you fail to realize that the chance of all outcomes must be the same.
I actually reread more of this mess and I admit that I didn't agree with mibuwolf that a random curve can tend to one side, which is wrong. Randomness can be biased by its own but in the end its still random nobody can predict and after all, every outcome has the same chance as any other.
After I told you that the game is favoring less links on items than more links you still claimed it's still random. So either you are mentally challenged or succeed in trolling me.
If something is manipulated how in the world is this still random. Are you nuts?

"

Deccode wrote:

I reread your griberish again and even now when I know what you tried to say it still doesnt make sense. If I said that the first picture doesn't show randomness then I was wrong yes. But yet you fail to realize that the chance of all outcomes must be the same.

Don't you see how you contradict yourself??

Here is what you are saying:
The first picture show randomness.
All chances of all outcomes must be the same.

BUT THE CHANCES OF ALL OUTCOMES ARE NOT THE SAME IN THE FIRST PICTURE.

"

Deccode wrote:

Randomness can be biased by its own but in the end its still random nobody can predict and after all, every outcome has the same chance as any other.

Why did you add that last part?? non-equal chances doesn't make it predictable.

"

Deccode wrote:

After I told you that the game is favoring less links on items than more links you still claimed it's still random. So either you are mentally challenged or succeed in trolling me.
If something is manipulated how in the world is this still random. Are you nuts?

Or you simply need to rethink what the hell you are saying.

"

Sickness wrote:

"

Deccode wrote:

I reread your griberish again and even now when I know what you tried to say it still doesnt make sense. If I said that the first picture doesn't show randomness then I was wrong yes. But yet you fail to realize that the chance of all outcomes must be the same.

Don't you see how you contradict yourself??

Here is what you are saying:
The first picture show randomness.
All chances of all outcomes must be the same.

BUT THE CHANCES OF ALL OUTCOMES ARE NOT THE SAME IN THE FIRST PICTURE.

"

Deccode wrote:

Randomness can be biased by its own but in the end its still random nobody can predict and after all, every outcome has the same chance as any other.

Why did you add that last part?? non-equal chances doesn't make it predictable.

"

Deccode wrote:

After I told you that the game is favoring less links on items than more links you still claimed it's still random. So either you are mentally challenged or succeed in trolling me.
If something is manipulated how in the world is this still random. Are you nuts?

Or you simply need to rethink what the hell you are saying.

I'm sure now you are retarded.
The first picture shows randomness.
All chances of all outcomes must be the same.
The chances are not shown in the first picture it's just 3 of different possible outcomes.

Next:
Non-equal chances doesn't make it predictable? Even equal chances doesn't make it predictable you low minded freak. You cannot predict randomness. Are you seriously questioning this?

I'm saying that you have no idea what you are talking about. You manipulate something, you say it's still random? Then you are dumb. Easy as that. I honestly can't tell you this easier.

Everyone shut up.

Randomness does NOT mean everything has to have an equal chance for it to occur. Just the fact that the outcome is unpredictable is random by definition.