Pointless argument about chance and randomness

"
Deccode wrote:
"
Sickness wrote:
"
Deccode wrote:

Holy shit for the 5th time I do agree with this because randomness will always tend to one side or to one number or something over anything. The point where we do not agree is when it is manipulated by something which is not randomness itself. A bias outside of its nature. I don't care if the result is still unpredictable. It is manipulated and not random.


If it's not random, then what is it?
How does it not fall under the definitions of random that we have given you?

Is it blindness or reading skills this time?


Is it predictable or is it random? You can't have it both ways. It's not 'random', 'biased', or 'predictable'. It's simply 'random' or 'predictable'.


You must understand that the terms "random selection" or "random sample" does not dictate the meaning of the word random.


-Randomness
2. Mathematics & Statistics Of or relating to a type of circumstance or event that is described by a probability distribution

What about that definition don't you understand?
Last edited by Sickness#1007 on Feb 14, 2013, 1:44:45 PM
This is a purely mathematical question, and as such it is best answered by people who are informed on that subject. Deccode, clearly, is not. I am. A random number does NOT have to be selected from a uniform distribution, like Deccode seems to be arguing.

Deccode, you are are not making any mathematical sense and should therefore be completely disregarded in the presence of people who actually know what they're talking about.
IGN Trinification
"
Sickness wrote:


Is it predictable or is it random? You can't have it both ways. It's not 'random', 'biased', or 'predictable'. It's simply 'random' or 'predictable'.


You must understand that the terms "random selection" or "random sample" does not dictate the meaning of the word random.


-Randomness
2. Mathematics & Statistics Of or relating to a type of circumstance or event that is described by a probability distribution

What about that definition don't you understand?

Oh you repeat well ok...
Is it blindness or reading skills this time?
"
QCD wrote:
This is a purely mathematical question,

Amm no it's not?
Last edited by Deccode#6112 on Feb 14, 2013, 1:59:10 PM
"
Deccode wrote:
]
Oh you repeat well ok...
Is it blindness or reading skills this time?


The problem is not on my end.

You have run out of steam. You can't answer questions or adress arguments.
"
Sickness wrote:
"
Deccode wrote:
]
Oh you repeat well ok...
Is it blindness or reading skills this time?


The problem is not on my end.

You have run out of steam. You can't answer questions or adress arguments.

I guess you do not even have enough steam to read page 19 very closely do you?
I'm not answering questions twice just because somebody is handicapped lol specially when the answer is on the same page.
Last edited by Deccode#6112 on Feb 14, 2013, 2:01:06 PM
"
Deccode wrote:

I guess you do not even have enough steam to read page 19 very closely do you?
I'm not answering questions twice just because somebody is handicapped lol specially when the answer is on the same page.
´

You did clearly not comprehend what I was saying.

I am saying that your idea of an event being not random, not predictable, but biased is complete BS. It is biased AND random. One does not exclude the other, because we are talking about randomness in general, not the specific terms "random sample" or "random selection".

There is a definition of randomness that you consistently ignore.
Last edited by Sickness#1007 on Feb 14, 2013, 2:13:22 PM
"
Sickness wrote:
"
Deccode wrote:

I guess you do not even have enough steam to read page 19 very closely do you?
I'm not answering questions twice just because somebody is handicapped lol specially when the answer is on the same page.
´

You did clearly not comprehend what I was saying.

I am saying that your idea of an event being not random, not predictable, but biased is complete BS. It is biased AND random. One does not exclude the other because we are talking about randomness in general, not the specific terms "random sample" or "random selection".

There is a definition of randomness that you consistently ignore.

And exactly that definition says that outcomes has to have equal chances.
I would probably call it false-randomness. You are like making an idiot of yourself, without any idea what you are talking about lmao.
Last edited by Deccode#6112 on Feb 14, 2013, 2:13:40 PM


It's furry like a kitten.
IGN: Mibuwolf
Last edited by mibuwolf#7946 on Feb 14, 2013, 2:15:05 PM
"
mibuwolf wrote:

hey look it's the guy who pretends to be calm enough and to let the conversation go multiple times and who agrees to disagree, but keeps coming back because pride to broken.
"
Deccode wrote:
hey look it's the guy who pretends to be calm enough and to let the conversation go multiple times and who agrees to disagree, but keeps coming back because pride to broken.


You baited me. Back to popcorn.



Continue.
IGN: Mibuwolf

Report Forum Post

Report Account:

Report Type

Additional Info