Discussion in 'The War Room' started by Fawlty, Oct 7, 2019.
not as cringey as banning him for no fu*king reason
It's most so because we now know he was a troll. He was ostensibly making fun of them and they're still pining for the act.
I wish the whole lot of them would get banned. Not like any of them bring anything insightful or even entertaining to the table.
It was very one sided, but incredibly entertanining...one of my favorite TNF experiences was RJJ vs Pazienza
You solve for sequencing, POL and relays before you deploy (ie communication) -- thats the point. You dont launch something without having the uncertainty of variables you can control accounted for. You would have abysmal deployment rates. What you cant control you deal with as uncertainty -- but contingency plans are always included.
I don't know why you say this like you're making a point, since that was precisely my point in saying your objection was faulty.
Captain Pedantic wants to jump in here but I'll spare you and just say that's pretty much the definition of wise. Within the context of the problem it's no different from "They are all perfect logicians -- if a conclusion can be logically deduced, they will do it instantly." To argue otherwise is grating pedantry of an undesirable sort. Back in the D&D days we called such reasoning rules lawyering.
I grant this is an interesting problem. I feel like I have encountered it before and that is an impediment, believe it or not. I will let it percolate.
are you getting dm's?
You thought matlab was something way off -- im showing why a matlab developer would want aqs much detail in their sequencing
Ok, but they are aiding in eliminating the need to question the question. And wise does not automatically mean intelligent or compatible with logic -- alot of people are wise, alot of those same people cant work an input button on their tv.
Drink your prune juice and let it percolate.
I"ve received a few. and they are all in good taste, and help to debunk some of the half truths and blatant lies spoken about the circumstances surrounding Rip's banning.
One thing that is really weird is that there are countless of posters, FAR WORSE ones who have been allowed back.
A ton of sustainable energy guys and self driving automobile engineers -- would make for a good future show.
Probably should just teach rip how to change his IP
Here is my attempt at a solution...
Given they are there 'endless years', they have to wait until the majority die. In fact, it is the night when the second-to-last blue eyed person has died. The number of remaining brown-eyed persons can be anything from 1 to 100. As all other persons are either blue-eyed or brown-eyed, the remaining blue-eyed person recognizes he's blue-eyed and turns to leave; at this point, the brown-eyed persons are able to recognize they must all be brown-eyed or else the blue-eyed person could not have known. They all leave the island, leaving the Guru behind.
What... debunking the half truths and blatant lies you were telling, and which you supposedly got from Rip?
Uncertainty is not the same as...cavalierness, which is how I think you're using the term. If were certain what was going to happen with the stock market, I wouldn't be modelling it statistically: I would just choose the single instrument that was going to increase the most in value and put all my capital there.
You could argue that in doing the modelling to the best of my ability, there's nothing more that can be done. However, once I purchase the instruments, all bets are off. I may be certain that, given that my model is correct the probability of going broke is such and such, but I am not certain that it won't happen. It's not just accounting for variables that we could measure if we had better and more precise instruments: they're more or less stochastic. We're deciding best how to behave in a stochastic reality.
For communication systems, if there weren't uncertainty, they wouldn't convey information.
Actually I am having a knot in my brain.
Seems like the brown-eyeds cannot know because they could also be red-eyed. So that means only the blue eyed one leaves?
I told no lies and acknowledged a mistake I made regarding an apology I thought Rip made. Besides that I made no other "lies" or "half truths." That's on you and your friends.
But you're accounting for all variables you thought of and can control before deploying. Your quant system can't manipulate the market but you can provide it enough markers to predict to a higher degree of certainty. You can calculate you risk assement during your development stage facing whatever implementation uncertainty you started with. That's what systems engs do on a daily
Your last statement needs clarification. Because I have designed many com sat deployments with a high degree of deployment before launch - are you talking about the duality of wavelengths, frequency, recievers, provisioning?
Hint, think of the situation if there was only 1 blue eyed person, then go to 2, and so on
But I even have uncertainty about my model. Typically, I will choose something that is tractable. It will certainly be wrong, to some degree though. This has parallels to radar. I have an antenna model (it is idealized) and a noise model (something with computable moments) and I make linear combinations to maximize SNR. That's all both dealing with uncertainty, but it's also a bit make believe.
Another example would be compressive sensing, where you typically design your compression matrix randomly. This is already being deployed in MRI.
A signal only has information, in a shannon sense, if it has uncertainty. The maximum throughput of your communication system will be directly proportional to the amount of entropy in the signal.
Speaking of far worse posters allowed back, is TheOldMan El Viejito/ProBoxingInsidr/El Anciano? You know him, right?
wait, were they all the same?
proboxing was a good poster because he often had interviews with pro boxers. (assuming that was him)
Edit: a mod did say that Anciano was the same guy.
Separate names with a comma.