Moderated Coin Flipper

[Leumas]

In case it isn't clear to anyone by this point, Leumas's version 2 does not allow for the possibility of an edge-landing, as he claimed.

Gonna go ahead and ask again: what are we talking about here?...

Certainly neither jt512 nor I owe you any sort of apology. On the other hand, an apology from you would be appropriate but, as history has demonstrated, unlikely.

I told him as much on the first page. Got a perseveration of pusillanimous piffle for my trouble.

The point of the OP was to falsify the claim that coin tosses will approximate 50/50 distribution over several runs... by proving that claim while attempting (and failing) to falsify the strawman claim that coin tosses will exactly match 50/50 distribution.

You have such very high standards of proof. I am in awe.

I am especially in awe of your ability to completely disregard the simple meaning of words in leaping to your breathtaking conclusions.

Pretty much any definition of slander includes a requirement for the statement being false and damaging to the reputation. Neither has been shown, so slander is not "clearly" shown.

Have you ever watched a comedy? Are you CONCERNED about it?

I can't help it. It's mesmerizing, like watching some guy willfully shut his eyes and crawl around in a room with hundreds of mousetraps all over the floor while denying that he has mousetraps all over his hands and feet.

Reminds me of "fools are so full of confidence, and wise men so full of doubts".

WOW.... what a lot of CONCERN!!!

Really appreciate all your concern guys... it is so satisfyingly affirming!

QED!!!

 

[theprestige]

Only to peers s/he respects and wants to show off to.

I've never met a good software developer that behaved this way.

 

[Thermal]

WOW.... what a lot of CONCERN!!!

Really appreciate all your concern guys... it is so satisfying affirming!

QED!!!

If receiving CONCERN is giving you such wood, could you please entitle your threads "Leumas Seeking Attention" and save everyone a lot of time?

 

[Leumas]

I've never met a good software developer that wasn't happy to describe the details of their implementation at the slightest sign of interest.

So true.

You flatter me. I would consider ctrl-U neither hacking nor particularly clever.

You are right... I retract it... on second thought I think you had some one show you how to do it or even do it for you... I doubt you did it.

If you could you would have done an app yourself to show how yours is so much more accurate and show off to others your programming ability as you said is so true.

See how that works???

So now prove me wrong like you did proving jt512 and yourself wrong.

In case it isn't clear to anyone by this point, Leumas's version 2 does not allow for the possibility of an edge-landing, as he claimed.

...but then we may interpret your silence in a light that you may find unfavorable.

(I know I have.)

... Leumas' Coin Flipper 2. If you look closely, you may discover how the "edge case" is handled....

 

[Leumas]

I've never met a good software developer that behaved this way.

Assuming again... I am not a software developer...


But thanks for thinking I am and a good one to boot... appreciate the compliment.


ETA: what way is that by the way???

 

[Leumas]

I can't help it. It's mesmerizing, like watching some guy willfully shut his eyes and crawl around in a room with hundreds of mousetraps all over the floor while denying that he has mousetraps all over his hands and feet.

If receiving CONCERN is giving you such wood, could you please entitle your threads "Leumas Seeking Attention" and save everyone a lot of time?

Your continued and incessant and relentless CONCERN does indeed allow me to say QED!!!

 

[Thermal]

Your continued and incessant and relentless CONCERN does indeed allow me to say QED!!!

I can't help it. It's mesmerizing, like watching some guy willfully shut his eyes and crawl around in a room with hundreds of mousetraps all over the floor while denying that he has mousetraps all over his hands and feet.

 

[Chanakya]

Edited by jimbob: 

****

 

[Leumas]

There is no need. I have seen the screenshots and the results are pretty much what you would expect whether the RNG used a formula or external noise.

Incidentally, this "landing on the edge" business seems to be getting quite heated. I don't know why. Before testing whether the next bit represents a H or T, just check if the next N bits are all zero. That would represent a probability of 1 / 2^N that the coin landed on the edge.

Now do you see how it is all nothing but a red herring?

 

[Leumas]

... I don't think that's the case here. I literally refrain from taking sides on the real underlying question here.)

What do you think now???

 

[Joe Random]

Seeing the pattern of select words or phrases getting fixed upon to where they get thrown out repeatedly and where ever possible (even perhaps randomly?) reminds me of this :





There's a 50/50 chance you've seen this skit before, God only knows why.

 

[jsfisher]

Now do you see how it is all nothing but a red herring?

You claim it to be a red herring, a distraction. It is not. The matter speaks to the reliability of your claims.

Simple (and appropriate) questions were asked about one of your claims. You repeated dodged and weaved instead of providing a simple answer. Reasonable conclusions were draw based on your lack of response: Your claim was not to be trusted.

Despite your lack of candor, more evidence about your claim was uncovered. It supported your admission you are not a great computer programmer, and it revealed the extent you implemented something for the so-called edge case. That being effectively nothing at all.

So, your claim to have implemented code to model the possibility of a coin landing on its edge was a lie.

 

[theprestige]

: sdl : Assuming again... I am not a software developer... : sdl :

Assuming what? That you're not a software developer? That you are a software developer but not a good one?

I'm assuming neither. I'm contrasting your behavior to that of good software developers of my acquaintance.

But thanks for thinking I am and a good one to boot... appreciate the compliment.: thumbsup :

Fantabulating that your interlocutor has expressed the oppositional to their veracitous expressment is a cyclopeanistically enormitudinal misplaced footfall in advantageousifying your locative idiom in a disputated Pretending I've said the opposite of what I've said won't change my mind or win you the argument.

ETA: what way is that by the way???

Withholding details of their implementation from anyone who asks.

 

[Thermal]

You claim it to be a red herring, a distraction. It is not. The matter speaks to the reliability of your claims.

Simple (and appropriate) questions were asked about one of your claims. You repeated dodged and weaved instead of providing a simple answer. Reasonable conclusions were draw based on your lack of response: Your claim was not to be trusted.

Despite your lack of candor, more evidence about your claim was uncovered. It supported your admission you are not a great computer programmer, and it revealed the extent you implemented something for the so-called edge case. That being effectively nothing at all.

So, your claim to have implemented code to model the possibility of a coin landing on its edge was a lie.

The only honest way to address the edge case would be insanely complicated, involving friction and wind and vibration and the plethora of other physical variables. That's the whole problem with any simulator that purports to mimic the natural world. It can't be anything more than a limited artificial approximation.

 

[Leumas]

Seeing the pattern of select words or phrases getting fixed upon to where they get thrown out repeatedly and where ever possible (even perhaps randomly?) reminds me of this

There's a 50/50 chance you've seen this skit before, God only knows why.

Yes... it reminds me of this

Do you know the hallmark of a second rater? It's resentment of another man's achievement. Those touchy mediocrities who sit trembling lest someone's work prove greater than their own...

 

[theprestige]

The only honest way to address the edge case would be insanely complicated, involving friction and wind and vibration and the plethora of other physical variables. That's the whole problem with any simulator that purports to mimic the natural world. It can't be anything more than a limited artificial approximation.

I dunno. I think you could get an approximation by assuming a three-faced "die" and weighting the possible outcomes by the area of each face. But it would be very approximate.

 

[Thermal]

Reminds me of "fools are so full of confidence, and wise men so full of doubts".

 

[Leumas]

...
I'm assuming neither. I'm contrasting your behavior to that of good software developers of my acquaintance.

Anecdotal and generalization fallacies... yes... so now you know the behaviour of all people who write programs because you know one who does.

Withholding details of their implementation from anyone who asks.

Really... then you have not met anyone who works on anything that matters or is of any consequence whatsoever.

 

[theprestige]

Yes... it reminds me of this

Bruh. It's not like you just invented a new form of steel that will revolutionize the railroad industry.

 

[Thermal]

Really... then you have not met anyone who works on anything that matters or is of any consequence whatsoever.

Like someone who pretends to flip coins and wonders what the odds might be?